John Benseman john.benseman@criticalinsight.co.nz




Four of the 18 courses were high impact & five as low impact
Classifications were based on a range of quantitative and qualitative variables
High-impact courses:
 providers with high workplace and high LLN experience
 high course and tutor ratings
 high personal impact on participants
 higher reading gains
 participants more likely to report doing their jobs better
(esp. in LLN-related tasks and oral communication)

 Brinkerhoff’s success case method (Brinkerhoff,
2003, 2005)
 Brinkerhoff argues that outliers are the most fruitful sources of data in understanding why programmes have not worked in some cases and why they have had high impact in others
 Understanding why courses have a high impact on some participants helps to identify factors that can then be replicated or accentuated in future courses

 The company





All key stakeholders in the company had clear understanding of the purpose and processes of course
Managers at all levels demonstrated high levels of support for and awareness of the courses (actively demonstrated, not just verbalised)
Course participants had relief workers or alternative arrangements were made to minimise intrusion
Teaching spaces on-site, consistently available, removed from outside distractions
LLN provision integrated into long-term training & company planning

 Providers/tutors
 Providers supported tutors with professional support and strong planning and logistics
 Providers had high level of experience of running workplace LLN
 Tutors were experienced in LLN teaching and workplace programmes; had LLN-related qualifications
 Tutors had high levels of commitment, prepared to be flexible

 Logistics





Recruited participants closely matched the purpose of the course & needs
Course purpose and content explained clearly to participants
Tutors hit the ground running to ensure learner motivation and retention
Teaching content promised to learners was delivered
Clear and ongoing communications between providers, tutors and company personnel

 The courses




Courses run in work time
Teaching content closely related to companies’ issues identified in learning needs analyses
Course content used company documentation and processes
Teaching content simultaneously related to company’s needs and learners’ specific learning needs/personal interests

 The learners
 Participants with high motivation and sense of commitment
 Consistent attendance at teaching sessions

 The company
 Companies had strong learning culture
 Companies publicly acknowledged the courses and learner achievements.

 Provider/tutors
 Providers closely involved in all pre-course processes, especially course planning, publicity and recruitment
 Minimal changes in tutoring personnel

 Logistics
 Participants grouped homogeneously according to LLN skills
 If applicable, courses held in the low season
 On-going contact between tutors and supervisors, including updates on learner progress in relation to work tasks