Facilitator Guidance: Conducting Online BRIDGE Workshops
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Facilitator Guidance:
Conducting Online BRIDGE Workshops
Page 1 of 17
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 3
Getting Started ........................................................................................................................ 3
Adapting Adult Teaching Methods to Online Format ................................................................. 4
Creating a Comfortable Online Learning Environment ............................................................... 9
Adaptation of BRIDGE Documents to Online Format ............................................................... 12
Facilitator Coordination and Preparation ................................................................................ 14
Participant Preparation .......................................................................................................... 15
Workshop Evaluation ............................................................................................................. 15
Post-Workshop Follow Up ...................................................................................................... 16
Page 2 of 17
Executive Summary
The global COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted daily life everywhere. Government ministries, academic
institutions, businesses, civil society and cultural institutions are all seeking ways to continue their
mandates and conduct daily affairs remotely using online spaces. Holding online training workshops,
particularly BRIDGE workshops, presents new challenges for facilitators to make sure that modules
remain engaging, interactive and effective ways for participants to build skills, gain knowledge, learn
from each other and be impactful.
The purpose of this guide is to assist facilitators that may be considering adapting and conducting
BRIDGE workshops online in a manner that this learner-centered, participatory and in keeping with
adult learning principles that are integral to BRIDGE. The guidance includes specific recommendations
for how to maintain BRIDGE’s interactive nature and structure, as well as how to create a comfortable
and relaxing learning environment in order to keep the audience interested and active during several
days of the workshop. This guide also contains practical examples of how to adapt BRIDGE materials,
and how to prepare both facilitators and participants for a successful online BRIDGE experience.
While developing these guidelines was prompted by the emergence of the Covid-19 pandemic, they
can be useful for beyond the current pandemic too including where due to other various reasons total
or partial conduct of online BRIDGE trainings are more feasible and advisable.This guidance was
developed by the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES). Special acknowledgments to
the facilitation and support team at IFES Ukraine: Mykhailo Gorkusha, Anastasia Matvienko, Aliona
Sheshenia, Yevhen Krikopolo, Eugenia Pavlovska and Meredith Applegate.
Getting Started
As the global coronavirus pandemic continues, we are all challenged to adapt to a new reality that
most often includes fewer in-person activities and more remote activities and meetings. Traditionally
BRIDGE has been impactful due to its reliance on a participatory methodology that emphasizes face-
to-face interaction. When considering the feasibility of conducting a BRIDGE workshop online it is
important to consider the technological capacity (experience and infrastructure) of the participants as
well as the extensive preparation by facilitators that is required to transfer the BRIDGE experience to
an online format.
There are two primary considerations when facing the possibility of conducting a BRIDGE workshop
online:
1. Is there enough time to prepare? Preparation for interactive, facilitator-led online learning
requires significant time and effort. The preparatory research, planning and adaptation that
is required to deliver BRIDGE online is even more significant and time consuming than for in-
person training. Facilitator teams should anticipate needing at least two weeks to prepare,
test and adapt facilitator and participant materials, compared to the typical one week for a
face-to-face BRIDGE workshop.
2. What is the appropriate online platform? The online tools and platforms listed as examples
in this guide are just some of the options available. Facilitators should research and be aware
Page 3 of 17
of what tools are most appropriate for each country context. For example, if participants are
most comfortable and familiar with using a specific video conferencing platform or interacting
with specific websites, facilitators should consider using these platforms first. Also, video
conferencing platforms that allow for breakout rooms should take precedence in selection
over those that do not.
Adapting Adult Teaching Methods to Online Format
Shifting from in-person delivery of BRIDGE to remote facilitation of an online workshop requires
thoughtful adaptation of training methods and techniques. When conceptualizing an online training,
it is important to examine how to approach each aspect of the session and consider the adaptations
that will be necessary to ensure that the learning objectives and methods are appropriately aligned.
First, when adapting traditional adult teaching methods to an online format, close attention should
be paid to the utility of the chosen training or teaching methodology. During preparation, facilitators
should consider the following questions:
How are the methods or approaches for in-person BRIDGE suitable to the content?
Does the method/approach need to be adapted to an online format?
What challenges can be faced when using the chosen method/approach online?
What additional tools can be useful for adaptation to the online format?
Holding a workshop online presents challenges with regards to maintaining interactivity and
participation that are hallmarks of adult teaching and learning methods. As with in-person workshops,
there can be elements of passive learning to provide basic introductory knowledge, such as mini-
lectures or reading materials aloud remain relevant for online interactive trainings, albeit with certain
specifics. However, it is even more critical with online learning to limit passive methods and encourage
engagement through interactive activity. The below outlines a number of general learning approaches
with key considerations for adaptation to an online format.
Mini Lecture. Mini lectures are an approach that can provide participants with basic knowledge for
further learning exercises. However, there are certain factors in online teaching that impact this
method:
Attention – Risk of losing the audience’s attention is many times higher in an online event
compared to a traditional classroom event; therefore, a mini-lecture must be clear, filled only
with absolutely necessary material and as concise as possible (duration of which should be
less than the traditional format);
Concentration on the Material – Use additional techniques to facilitate the audience’s
concentration such as structured slides with itemized information, clear articulation and
emphasis on important information, other techniques enabling you to highlight appropriately
and help the audience perceive information;
Communication – The longer the mini-lecture focuses on the facilitator's work, the higher the
risk of losing the audience’s attention and concentration. Ask questions to solicit comments
or remarks, supplement material with a brief commentary or statement from a fellow
facilitator, use everything that will be conducive to continuity and enhance your confidence
that all participants are involved with you.
Page 4 of 17
Reading. During the online event, reading can be used as in a traditional classroom event – in mini-
groups – or for the entire audience. Reading during the workshop is a good alternative to a mini lecture
in terms of saturating participants with primary knowledge. Let participants read a file containing only
a fragment of the material which is needed to perform a specific task. As a passive learning method,
similar to a mini-lecture, reading should be short and meaningful or assigned to participants to
complete independently between workshop days.
Work in Mini-Groups to Address Problems. If allowed by the conference platform’s functionality, it
may be possible for participants to work in mini-groups/breakout rooms. This is highly recommended.
It is necessary to envisage in advance how group feedback is collected, and additional resources needed
for the group’s work (for example, text materials, Google documents replacing a flip chart sheet and
interactive virtual sticker boards).
For an effective start of group exercises, it is recommended that different facilitators enter virtual
rooms – one per group – to provide references to necessary materials and instructions, explain the
task and help participants. However, if the facilitator is permanently present in a mini-group alongside
participants, they may see this as supervision and control, or rely too much on the facilitator’s help in
performing the task. For effectiveness of all groups, as in a traditional classroom workshop, it is
advisable that the facilitator join the group at the beginning of the session, determine if the task was
understood, provide additional expectations and demonstrate how to work with the recommended
tools. Then, after a period of time, the facilitator should join the group to ensure the proper group
direction.
Group Discussions. These can be conducted with the full audience or in mini-groups. To a large extent,
the foundation for conducting group discussions is when participants familiarize themselves with
instructions on how to join the online training. This includes introductory words at the beginning of the
event on utilizing the platform tools under which the event is held – for example, hand-raising,
responding and switching the microphone on and off.
The facilitator should moderate this process, indicating who is to speak next and who will have the right
to respond later so that participants feel involved and assured they will be able to join the discussion.
This approach avoids the need to repeatedly remind participants that they should express themselves
in different ways by physically raising their hands and writing something in the chat. If there is
confidence in the announced order of responses, the process becomes more orderly.
Additional online software tools that can be used to meet various needs of group discussions are
Mentimeter1, or online presentations in which users interact with the presentation; and, Miro2, or
virtual interactive boards.
On the whole, visualization positively contributes to structured group discussion. For example, if
interesting results have been obtained in the mini-groups, they can be presented to the entire audience,
mini-group representatives can be asked to comment and the audience will be invited to ask questions
about the presented results. However, if something is to be demonstrated, it is preferable for the
presentation to be performed by the facilitator so that all scenarios for developing interaction and
1 www.mentimeter.com
2 www.miro.com
Page 5 of 17
jointly processing the content will be controlled by the training team. This ensures integrity and
timeliness in the training program.
When it comes to a discussion involving a large audience, the rule of a participant’s microphone being
switched off until he or she is asked to speak should be in effect to moderate conversation. The “hand-
raising” function will also help facilitate the process by encouraging participants to take turns
speaking.
Brainstorming. This exercise
should be dynamic, effective and
time-limited so that a new
activity planned under the
program can be started soon.
Brainstorming is meant to
invigorate the audience and
stimulate actions planned under
the online teaching event.
Example: Group discussion “Agree/Disagree” about conditions for effective
operation. Adaptation of the brainstorming
approach to the online format
provides wide opportunities due to accessible online tools. To conduct brainstorming online, for
example, one can use Mentimeter – the interactive online presentations in which users interact with
the presentation or
Miro, the virtual
interactive boards. Using
different templates
enables the facilitator to
quickly collect feedback
and participants’
thoughts on an issue and
describe their collective
opinion.
Using online
instruments requires
clear instructions and
supplementary
explanations. Before
starting the exercise, the facilitator should ensure all participants are able to connect to the tool and
understand how to use it. When participants’ interaction with online instruments is complete, it is
important to proceed to a general session discussion format and motivate participants to debate the
results.
Example: Brainstorming on arguments “FOR” and “AGAINST” introducing spending limits as
elements in Mentimeter
Page 6 of 17
Exercises in Analysis,
Classification, Ranking,
Comparison and Search
for Solutions. With
special templates in Miro
– for example, mental
maps – or Mentimeter,
the facilitator can
organize analysis in which
all participants will be
involved.
A group can be asked to
Example: Virtual board Miro with a set of stickers for brainstorming.
drag correct statements
into the respective box,
analogous to using stickers and be presented with a specially prepared message for editing by the
entire group. To organize the process, a virtual group can either designate a participant who will
implement the general instructions and decisions adopted by the group regarding placement of
individual elements or distribute responsibilities for separate parts of the content and coordinate the
overall result.
Reviewing and Analyzing Texts. In these types of exercises, online documents with joint content
editing and processing features can come in handy, for example, Google Docs. Before using this
method, participants should be assisted in structuring the document. For example, facilitators can
consider asking
them to complete a
table.
Instructions on
performing the task
should be
duplicated in the
document. If
participants are to
familiarize
themselves with a
certain text before
they start working
on the task, a link to
such text should be
provided in the Example: Ranking of sanctions by strength of their effect. Mentimeter.
document itself. In
case of exercises involving preliminary reading, participants should be asked to read a small textual
fragment but should not have to search in the document for the text to be read.
Page 7 of 17
Role Playing. Role
playing is an excellent
way to determine the
attitudes of the parties
involved, making it
possible to model certain
situations in order to
analyze the
consequences of events
and behaviors. It should
be noted that the method
Example: Identification of the guiding principles for the normative legal framework for
is highly dynamic, evoking
regulating political finance in Google Docs. emotional responses from
participants. It is useful
because it enables participants to feel what another interested party may feel. It may seem the format
of online learning does not provide for the possibility to organize role playing.
Certain variations of
role playing can be
limited in the online
environment. Similar to
traditional classroom
format, the basic
requirements still
include careful
preparation for the
game and clear
instructions for
participants while
formulating a game
where playing will be
Example: Role play game “An even playing ground. The role of money in politics.” Mentimeter sufficiently controlled;
but, participants will
have a chance to get deep enough into their role.
One example of role playing organized with these principles is meant to reveal attitudes, capacities,
functions and behavioral stereotypes of the actors’ various social, cultural and political roles. To conduct
such a game in the online format, a set of roles must be prepared in advance. Description of the roles
can be outlined by the facilitators. Participants may be asked to ponder their role without any hints
from outside and to forecast the behavior of their character.
While playing the game, participants must either make or refrain from a certain step if the role dictates.
Questions/steps are asked in yes or no format and participants base their answers on pre-assigned
roles. For example, “I am allowed to run for office” – if a participant’s assigned identity implies that
Page 8 of 17
they can run for office, then they would answer “yes” and if not, then “no.” Tools can be used in online
format to conduct intellectual games in the form of quizzes. The chosen online tool must have the
function of visually counting “points.” For each step, the role played by a participant will be awarded
one point. The visualization of the “score table” based on results of the game will be an excellent basis
for discussing outcomes with participants.
Creating a Comfortable Online Learning Environment
As with any BRIDGE workshop, creating an atmosphere that is conducive to participatory learning is
essential. Creating a comfortable online learning space for online BRIDGE workshop participants
requires facilitators to carefully consider key aspects of the workshop from how to form meaningful
connections with participants to the timing and duration of the training sessions.
Introductions and Intrapersonal Connections. Mutual introduction of participants is crucial since it
performs the function of adapting participants to the online environment. The “getting to know you”
stage helps participants relax and communicate with each other. As with an in-person workshop, taking
the time needed to establish interpersonal connections from the outset will prove beneficial during
the entire training.
Depending on the software used, introductions can take different forms. Some tools make it possible
to create virtual rooms, or session halls, within one video conference. These tools will make it possible
to break into small groups or teams to get to know each other and then introduce each other to the
larger group. It is possible to then conduct participants’ acquaintance in pairs in small breakout rooms.
Additional features of virtual rooms include a timer and advance warning for closing the rooms. Pay
attention to these options when managing this exercise because they contribute to overall dynamics and
speed up the process.
To maintain momentum while performing this exercise, ask the participants, upon their return to the
main video conference session to speak in an alternating sequence, telling others about the partner
with whom they have just made acquaintance, or to invite someone to speak who has not been part
of their pair. This will be conducive to confidence-building and joint ownership of the process and will
also demonstrate the equality of relations between the facilitators and participants and their focus on
the objective. It also shows the facilitator as a source of assistance.
Establishing Participants’ Expectations. Revealing participants’ expectations is an important element
of any adult training event. Interactive online teaching events are no exception. At the preparatory
stage for the teaching event participants identify priorities in detail so that, at the beginning of the
event, facilitators can determine other subjects that are in demand.
Determining participants’ expectations is also a basis for the way in which the training exercises should
be presented and for highlighting the event’s objectives. An approach based on active identification of
participants’ expectations is conducive to building a trusting relationship between facilitators and
participants. It also functions as an icebreaker. In the online environment, any online tools used for
brainstorming are suitable for managing and fulfilling participants’ expectations.
Page 9 of 17
Example: Cloud of participants’ expectations in Mentimeter.
Participant Engagement. Similar to an in-person format, these tools are used to warm up the
audience, establish confidence among participants and build a comfortable environment in which
constructive discussions are encouraged. It also helps to shift attention to a different subject when
participants grow weary of a topic that has lost momentum. When conducting online training,
participants may be distracted or tire more easily. Thus, energizers and icebreakers should be used
more frequently during online training events.
Other methods of audience engagement must be adapted to the online format. This could include going
a quick demonstration of activities in front of the camera (e.g. scavenger hunts or creating a hat from
materials nearby, intellectual warm-up activities such as brain teasers or riddles; and, physical
exercises). Additional examples appear below:
Example: Mini-quiz energizer.
Page 10 of 17Example: Mini-quiz energizer.
Example: Brain-teaser.
Example 12. Physical warm-up activity. The participants repeat instructions after the facilitator.
Page 11 of 17Example: Energizer “The Hat.” The facilitator asks participants to put on a real hat or to construct it from any item they have
at hand.
Time Management. This is also an element directly related to creating a comfortable and productive
training environment. When conducting interactive online trainings, characterized by limited space
and movement opportunities, one should not expect that participants will demonstrate active
participation and high involvement throughout the entire workday. Working hours should be
optimized and shortened, and rely on stable internet-connectivity during the specific time.
The recommended length of online sessions is not to exceed four hours, including one or two breaks.
When adapting training modules to online formats, facilitators should consider the following options:
Increasing the number of training workdays without exceeding the four-hour training limit for one
workday; abridging a part of the material that will be presented to participants during interactive
training while proposing they familiarize themselves with the other elements outside the online
sessions. With such an approach, teaching objectives should be formulated with caution. It would be
unreasonable to expect all participants will thoroughly do their homework. During online sessions,
participants should be provided with material that is crucial for achieving training objectives.
Adaptation of BRIDGE Documents to Online Format
BRIDGE workshops conducted online utilize the same types of workshop materials that are used in the
traditional classroom format. Below is a discussion of how these materials and resources may need
to be adapted to the online environment:
FN – Facilitator’s Notes
As with the traditional format of a BRIDGE workshop, facilitator’s notes must be clear and meaningful;
moreover, they are to outline the complete list of actions to be performed by the facilitator in the
course of the workshop and contain references to all resources used during the training.
Page 12 of 17PS – Presentation Files/Slides
These are used in the same way as presentations in the classroom format are used. When using PPT
presentations, the facilitator opens slides on the screen of his or her computer and shares the screen
with all participants in the online conference.
HO – Handouts
Handouts should be adapted to the online environment. Google documents open for editing can be
used; these should contain tasks prepared by the facilitators such as empty tables that the participants
will be required to complete. Miro boards can be suitable and participants can use stickers to perform
certain actions (like making logical comparisons.
FR – Facilitator’s Resources
For facilitators’ convenience during an online training, a special resource should be created – a
summary file containing the set of all materials: PN, HO and online tools used during the day.
It is recommended that materials be placed in the sequence in which they are to be used in each
teaching session. For materials to be used during work in mini-groups, it is advisable to provide for use
of the proposed material by the group for which it is intended, especially when each group works with
materials of different content.
PN – Participants’ Notes
Contrary to the traditional approach of collecting PN materials in a single document, the online format
requires keeping a separate PDF file for each element that will be used for participants’ reading
regardless of whether it will be used during an online session or will be presented to participants for
individual familiarization.
Each separate PN file must be supplemented with material that the participants will have to familiarize
themselves with when performing a specific exercise. Under such an approach, it will be easier for
participants to navigate through the material; moreover, no negative response will be formed to the
volume of participants’ materials.
It is recommended that separate material be prepared with instructions on how to activate and use
features of the online training. It is advisable this introductory-material be sent to participants in
advance before the workshop. Participants’ familiarization with instructions will help raise their level
of confidence in using the program’s interface, speed up their entry into online training and save time
and attention for the course’s technical elements.
Instructions to participants are recommended to contain the following information:
Minimum technical requirements for workshop participation. For example, a personal
computer, stable connection to the Internet, a web camera and a microphone;
How to launch the program in which the online training will be conducted;
How to check if the video and audio of the program being used are working properly;
How the process of joining the online event will occur. What is the best time to connect? How
many minutes before the start of the event? What will participants see while waiting for the
connection or during the connection?; and,
How to use the functionality of the platform on which the training will take place during the
online event:
Page 13 of 17○ Camera and microphone on/off option;
○ Hand-raising;
○ Work with the chat feature;
○ Response using emojis; and,
○ Any other elements provided for by the software’s functionality.
Facilitator Coordination and Preparation
Coordination of the BRIDGE facilitators’ team during preparation and the online training should be
expected and planned accordingly. Compared to the traditional classroom, an online event may
require greater attention and involvement of the whole facilitation-team and ability of the facilitators
to interact with each other without attracting additional attention from participants.
Below are a number of hints on team-work for online training:
● Piloting. Conducting interactive training in the online format is associated with a high level of
uncertainty, especially in cases where facilitators do not have sufficient experience in
conducting interactive training in such environments. That is why piloting is a reliable assistant
in online training preparation. It will help track current needs for achieving teaching objectives
during each session and determine if facilitators’ chosen methods work properly. It will allow
training modules to be adjusted with consideration of challenges identified during the pilot.
Circumstances permitting, the most appropriate audiences for piloting will be employees of the
institutions organizing the training or friendly audiences which sympathize with the objective.
Piloting is tolerant of certain discrepancies with the announced timing, technical difficulties
and provides useful, honest feedback;
● Technical Elements. If the training is conducted by more than one facilitator, which is recommended,
they all must have the same level of skills and opportunities to use the online tools in the
training.
Test each software-tool together as a team to ensure its functions are sufficient to meet the teaching
needs and situations, developing back-up plans if they fail during training.
Before starting the training, alternative plans should be developed for situations where the stable
connectivity is interrupted – for example, disconnection from the Internet or a power outage. For a
consistent response to such circumstances, it should be determined in advance which co-facilitator
will promptly take up moderation of the session if the lead-moderator for a session is no longer
available for any reason.
Online Event Administrator/Host. Include a specialist who is sufficiently knowledgeable
about the training scenario to assume moderation of all administrative questions, including
creation of virtual rooms for group activities, sending necessary work messages, conducting
online participant registration and communicating with participants should they encounter
technical difficulties;
The Facilitation Team’s Internal Communication Platform. It will be useful for the team of
facilitators and the moderator to provide an instant messaging-platform on which they will be
able to communicate with each other quickly and efficiently during an event without attracting
participants’ attention. Any messages that are convenient for the team will be appropriate to
address and meet those needs.
Page 14 of 17In order to allow facilitators to focus solely on technical facilitation and engagement, facilitator teams
should consider what logistical and technical support they will need. For example, the role of an
“Administrator/Host” can be assigned to a non-facilitator. This Host could be in charge of:
Letting participants in from the “lobby.”
Familiarizing participants with online platform functions to make sure that people understand
the basics of the technology they are using.
Reminding participants to fill in pre and post-tests and evaluations of each training.
Breaking participants into breakout rooms.
Muting participants who forget to turn off their microphones.
Trouble-shooting technical issues.
Calling absent or missing participants, working with IT help to solve microphone/video
connection issues with participants, etc.
Informing participants well in advance and clearly about the call arrangements including if it
is going to be audio only, video, or other arrangements
Participant Preparation
Delivering BRIDGE online may require extra efforts to prepare workshop participants for a successful
training experience.
Prior to the training, participants should be sent basic instructions on how to log on and use the
conferencing platform selected by the facilitator team. The facilitation team should, if possible,
contact each participant a few days before the training to test their ability to use this platform,
assessing connectivity, ensuring that participants understand that this will be an interactive training,
and making recommendations to participants in terms of IT-setup.
Participants should be encouraged to call into the workshop using a computer if at all possible, rather
than a mobile phone, and to try to use a device with a working camera. Mobile phones are multi-
functional devices and are more prone to interruptions such as phone calls during training. Using a
computer (desktop or laptop) for this training makes participants much more comfortable, frees up
their hands and allows them to use a secondary device (such as a smart phone) to participate in other
activities (though participants can also use their computer on their browser for these if they do not
have a mobile phone). Laptops (or tablets) often contain all the hardware needed, such as camera,
sound, microphone, headphone jack, etc need for online training.
Workshop Evaluation
Delivering BRIDGE online affords facilitators the opportunity to gain feedback from participants in a manner
that may not be feasible or practical with in-person workshops. Below are evaluation opportunities that have
been successfully piloted when conducting online trainings:
Pre- and Post- Tests. The evaluation method makes it possible to evaluate participants’’ learning progress
by asking them to pass a test twice with the same set of questions; namely at the beginning and the
conclusion of the training. The pre-and-post testing method will also enable facilitators to track
anomalies in the training process and identify gaps in sections of material. The method of basic and
final evaluation provides for anonymity to those completing the questionnaire. It requires identification
of questionnaires based on randomly assigned “blind” numbers in order to track and correlate
Page 15 of 17responses. The online format demands creativity in keeping questionnaires anonymous. Participants
can be asked to indicate in the questionnaire the name of the street on which they were born, the
name of their pet, the maiden name of their mother and so on. This serves as a unique identifier to
track responses in the pre- and post-test.
Google Forms (questionnaires) are useful in organizing the technical element. It is also possible to
provide determination of correct answers which will help participants during the final evaluation to
see their achievements based on results of the training.
Verbal Evaluation by Participants. Evaluation by participants is an important element of each training
process because it is a source of knowledge about course effectiveness from the participants’
viewpoint while also providing insight into what is needed to improve training modules. Similar to the
traditional classroom format, it is recommended that evaluation be conducted at the end of each day
of training, preferably as part of the sessions. Evaluation can answer facilitators’ requests for a verbal
comment from anyone in the audience and on the final day of training all participants may be asked
to express their view. If the training was short, there may be not enough time for establishing a trusting
relationship among all the participants or between them and facilitators. Under such circumstances,
the best option is to ask that only those interested in voicing their impressions, do so.
Facilitators act as moderators in verbal evaluations. If participants mention problems in assimilating
the material, facilitators should pay attention during the next day, and if possible, refer participants
to additional reading sources.
Anonymous Evaluation by Participants. Unlike verbal evaluation, anonymous evaluation provides for
completing questionnaires with a list of closed-ended questions and the opportunity for participants to
express their impressions when answering open-ended questions. Under this approach, indication of
the participant’s name in the questionnaire is an option since the anonymous format makes
participants feel free in describing their impressions, priorities and problems they have encountered.
It may also make sense to have separate evaluation questionnaires for each day of training so that
facilitators will appropriately adjust their teaching for the next day. From as software-standpoint,
Google Forms are an effective tool for evaluation.
Post-Workshop Follow Up
Once the online workshop has been completed, post-workshop follow-up serves as an effective means
for group learning and establishing lasting connections with workshop participants. Recommended
follow up actions by the facilitator team include the following:
After each day of the workshop, it is recommended to hold short feedback sessions with the
facilitator team that includes technical feedback and feedback on the participation of the
group. This may include brainstorming about how to continue to keep or increase the
participation of participants in the workshop.
After the completion of the module, organize a debrief amongst the facilitator team and
organizers to evaluate how the workshop went, gather lessons learned, and evaluate the IT
platforms used to see if they should be continued in the future. Look carefully at participant
Page 16 of 17feedback shared both in the evaluation and during the reflection session at the end of the
workshop to ensure that these remarks are carried through into future trainings.
With online trainings, participants will not be able to immediately receive hard-copy
certificates. Make sure to send certificates via email for participants to print and/or consider
if it is possible to send hard-copies of these certificates to the participants following the event.
Include, if possible, a group “screenshot” from the training, to remind participants of the
connections they made to their peers during the training.
In our continuous efforts to support the BRIDGE facilitator community, the BRIDGE Partners welcome
your thoughts, feedback and comments on how this guide can continue to be enhanced to support the
conduct of online BRIDGE workshops. Please send your thoughts to bridge@aec.gov.au
Page 17 of 17You can also read
