Clean Middle East has been interacting with food safety trainers and inspectors and we have been able to gauge issues that are important to the nature and scope of their responsibilities. We invite readers to talk about issues or doubts and send your queries to the editor of Clean Middle East at asfia@cleanmiddleeast.ae. Your issues will be addressed by Dr Jeremy Taylor, BA MEd PhD (Manager, TSI Quality Services).

Dr Taylor has worked in five star hotels and taught professional cookery, prior to his appointment to a University of London’s teacher training college for 15 years. Other full time appointments include government education advisory services, course and examination development for major awarding bodies and a key team member of the UK Food Standards Agency team that developed HACCP for catering. Dr Taylor has also been a moderator and chief examiner for a large number of major national and international examining bodies for over forty years and is a Fellow of the College of Teachers.

The questions we carry in this issue have been addressed by Shaina Oakden (BSc Psych Hons), Food Safety Trainer and Franchise Coordinator Subway, UAE. Oakden has worked for the Subway Franchise for the last seven years in roles ranging from Sandwich Artist, Store Manager, Field Consultant and Trainer/Coordinator. She has recently been certified as a train-the-trainer for HACCP systems and is now in the process of introducing the Menu-Safe system to the Subway Franchise in the UAE.

What percentage of time should a trainer talk through a training session?
It is difficult to measure natural environments, such as training because no two situations will be exactly the same. However, we can still consider principles for guidance.
Firstly, most people agree that even university students cannot concentrate for long periods of time with one-way communication lectures. Psychologists have put forward many theories to help us understand this aspect of learning, but it
Food Safety Training:

A training session should not be approached in the same way as a conference presentation that is intended for large audiences. Trainers may consider sitting in conference presentations all day and review how much they have learnt.

Therefore it is not just about educational level but simply to make training as natural as possible and involve the trainees throughout the session in planned and valid structured exercises with adequate follow-up to establish learning points.
For a fairly easy to use reference on this topic, we can consider the Learning Pyramid: http://www.simulations.co.uk/pyramid.htm

This theory gives a brief overview of training methods and associated retention times. The indication is that learning is more effective with participatory activity as opposed to passive learning. For example, the model gives a 5% retention rate for lectures, (passive learning) and a 75% retention rate for practice by doing. If we can accept these figures as broadly accurate, there is obviously a strong case for active participation by the trainees. If the trainees are actively involved, the trainer needs to consider carefully how much they actually need to talk. Using the TSI approach to training on recent PIC courses it was found that the training is split between trainer talk, trainee activity and trainee talk. The proportions will depend upon the groups, but all three kinds of learning must be involved.

What are the most common weaknesses in trainers?
To answer this question fairly, we need to recognize the varied conditions that trainers work with.There is of course no such thing as the perfect training session, but some are considerably better than others.

The reasons for this variation in standards will depend upon the trainers’ ability to manage a complex set of constraints.

Firstly, training groups will differ in a number of ways such as, age, background experience, language ability, level of education, personality and reason for being on a course. On the last point, trainees attending a mandatory course can be far less motivated than those attending a voluntary course.

Secondly, training venues are very different, such as, location, space, noise levels and other distractions. On the issue of venue, we can also consider whether the course is in-house or offsite.

Thirdly and perhaps the most important point will be the course aims and objectives and the appropriateness and validity of the training materials. Training materials are likely to be more successful if prepared by qualified teachers with a practical knowledge of the psychology of learning.

Therefore, the success of any training session will depend, to a large extent, upon the trainer’s ability to manage the ‘training conditions’.

Of course, to discuss these points fully would require a book rather than a small article, but many trainers will recognize the frustrations that they have to manage.

As far as the trainer’s performance is concerned, the most significant quality is commitment and the trainer’s own ability to learn. This quality will underpin their attitude toward their trainees. If a trainer has little interest or respect for the trainees and fails to use their background knowledge to help them to learn then the training will fail for both trainees and trainer.

If a quick checklist is required we can identify possible weaknesses as:
• too much trainer talk
• no real interest in trainees
• inability to manage time
• inclusion of material for the wrong level of trainees (too complex or too simple)
• lack of awareness of the aims and objectives of the course
• failure to brief trainees adequately for exercises
• failure to monitor progress and
• lack of listening to trainee’s answers

Over the years, I have most likely been guilty of some or all of these weaknesses; but the important point for any trainer is to try to improve on their last performance. Therefore, the main strength of a trainer is being able to evaluate his or her own performance accurately.
For further discussion or debate on training you are free to visit/join, http://www.menu-safe.com/forums