A Guide to Co-training in Face-to-Face Programs

James A. McCaffery and Wilma J. Gormley
Training Resources Group, Inc. (TRG)
Copyright 1992, 2014
All rights reserved.
Reproduction by any means is
prohibited without TRG’s written permission.

---

It is important to note that this co-training article is aimed at optimizing learning in face-to-face training sessions.  There is a growing field of e-learning that uses a variety of different kinds of formats, and there is much to be learned about which mixture of training, learning and IT team skills will provide the most effective programs and results.  Some of the guidance in this article may apply, but e-learning is sufficiently different that it calls for its own article.

Co-training: What Is It?

Co-training takes place when trainers (usually two, sometimes more) work together to design and conduct a session. It is much more involved than simply taking turns; it involves two trainers who are merging their skills, expertise, and experience to jointly design, plan, and conduct a training session or program. The synergistic effect of co-training generally results in a product better than either person would have produced alone.

Co-training works best when it involves both the design and implementation of a session or a program.  For example, co-trainers should work collaboratively to design the training session, combining their thoughts on what they want to accomplish and which training methods are best to use to meet desired goals. Once the design is complete, and as part of the planning process, the co-trainers then discuss and agree on who takes the lead in delivering various parts of a session or program.  During training implementation, if the program is longer than one day, it is useful for the co-trainers to debrief at the end of the day, review progress, and decide on any appropriate changes for the next day.  And if it is a program that might get delivered sometime in the future, it is good to do an overall program debriefing, capturing lessons learned for future application.

Co-training, as we are describing it, does not imply any particular difference in status or skill level between the two trainers. There may be differences in skill level, and that ought to be considered in determining which trainer does what. However, co-training should not be based on a senior/junior trainer scheme.

Advantages of Co-training

1. Co-training lessens the burden placed upon each trainer. Taking lead responsibility means that one trainer is responsible for leading the group through that particular part of the session. While the lead trainer takes principal responsibility, the co-trainer can provide support in the following ways:
   • assist the lead trainer in carrying out the session;
   • observe the process closely to gauge how well the session is meeting the overall learning goals;
   • add relevant points to augment discussion;
   • step in to clarify points (in a non-disruptive manner);
   • monitor small group tasks;
   • help respond to participant needs or requests; and
   • ask questions the lead trainer might have overlooked.

Typically, lead session responsibility shifts from trainer to trainer during the course of a workshop. This is a good way to establish the co-equal status of the two trainers with the group. In addition, and perhaps more important, this provides helpful variety for participants as they get exposed to different voices, perpectives and styles during the course of a program.

2. Co-training improves quality of interaction between trainers and participants. Many of the trainer interventions described as co-trainer tasks can be done by the lead trainer alone. However, leading a training session puts one trainer in front of the group who must concentrate on several things at once. The lead trainer might thus miss an opportune point or a probing question that might yield fertile results, or fail to notice a quieter participant who has been trying to enter the discussion and needs a nudge. A co-trainer is in a perfect position to make these interventions, because s/he is looking at the session from a different vantage point and is freed from the lead trainer responsibility.

When two trainers work well together, the interchange of roles and the timing and pacing of their interventions are fluid and almost unnoticed by participants.

3. Co-training increases the ratio of trainer to trainee. This is important in experiential training, which unlike more traditional presentation oriented training, relies on the trainers to facilitate and work closely with individuals and small groups, and stimulate learning by bringing out and building on participant contributions within the overall framework of the program.
4. Co-training makes it possible to share the work and reduce fatigue and burnout.
5. Co-training provides stimulating variety for participants, since it is easier to get bored when working with only one trainer.
6. Co-training provides a quicker way to improve a training session. Both trainers are analyzing, evaluating, and thinking of ways to train better next time.
7. Co-training allows trainers to debrief sessions together and even let off steam caused by design problems or troublesome participants.
8. Co-training generally allows a synergistic team approach to creating a very complicated product.  Two (or more) heads are often better than one when developing experiential training designed to change participant behavior and enhance skills.