Curriculum Guidelines

Alliance trainings should be active and engaging, because this is the best fit with how adults learn. Adults arrive with life experiences and existing knowledge and skills. They also have competing demands for their time. For their brains to be engaged, we need to have (and keep) their attention. This means that trainings should be offering them something to do every few minutes. This could be small (“Give me a thumbs up if this fits with your experience as a caregiver” and “Find a partner and jot down as many examples as you can of…”) or large (“Read the scenario and as a group come up with at least three approaches you might use with this caregiver to help you understand whether the placement can and should be maintained” and “Role play this situation using the skills we just reviewed”). Gamification is the application of game design elements to educational settings with the goal of increased engagement in learning. Trainings must regularly ask participants to engage with the material and each other, and gamification is a wonderful strategy to consider.

One challenge we’ll need to overcome is that our learners have a range of experiences, knowledge, values, and skills. Selecting activities that are “just right” to support your objectives will be especially difficult given this diversity. It’s very tempting to train to the least knowledgeable and least skilled folks in your audience. This leads to a training that’s boring for most participants. 

What is the alternative? Creating activities where participants work together to utilize their collective knowledge and skills. Simulation is a technique to consider that amplifies real experiences with guided experiences that evoke or replicate substantial aspects of the real world
in a fully interactive manner. Debriefing is the most important feature of simulation based learning (further defined in Appendix G: Active Learning Definitions and Guidance). Less informed participants will learn from more knowledgeable ones. More advanced participants will
offer comments and model skills that will be helpful for everyone. Facilitators then are responsible only for providing the information, application, or demonstration that none of the groups generated on their own. This is an approach that can be used when developing activities related to knowledge, values, or skills objectives.

Here are ideas about specific activities and types of engagement that might work best for each objective type. Many more options are possible and listed in Appendix G: Active Learning Definitions and Guidance.

Matching: Provide definitions and/or examples of key concepts or vocabulary (or even skills) and have participants match them. Depending on the group, you often do not have to discuss the definitions first. Participants working in groups can find their way to most answers. You can encourage guessing. Then during the debrief groups who got the correct answers can explain why, and facilitators only need to refine the points that were missed.

Have them tell you: Do you need to ensure that everyone knows a timeframe or fine points of a policy? Just have the group call them out. Note them on a whiteboard (virtual or physical). Then move to some type of application or challenge so they can do something with this information. If many people in the group know this information, there’s no reason for a facilitator to be the one
to review it.

Examples (yes/no) and explanations: Give people an example of the concept in practice and ask them if it’s been applied correctly. For instance, “Ms. Thomas agrees to allow Suzanne to live in the home for the next 4 days and to make final decisions on discipline and feeding.” “Is this an acceptable safety plan item, based on the criteria we just discussed? Why or Why not?”

Read and reflect activities: Have participants read information that you might have been tempted to lecture on. This can be a published article or a handout you developed. Then have them do something with it, either in a group or individually. Apply it to a real experience they’ve had. Generate a list of criticisms and strengths of the approach. Write down three contexts in which they would use this information to guide them in approaching a situation differently. They are engaging with the new learning in an active way and the engagement will increase their retention of the information.

Sort/order activities: Need people to know the steps of a process? Have them put them in order. It’s ok if it’s just a guess (in fact, this may increase participation). Then debrief the correct order and see what participants can explain about what happens in each step. Fill in or correct information as needed.

What doesn’t usually work:
Lecture: It’s generally boring and doesn’t leverage the collective knowledge of the group

No matter what actions or activities you choose here, it’s important to deliver content related to values in a respectful way. Sending the subtle message “If you cared more about this then…” is a sure way to offend many participants and will not be effective in changing hearts or minds.

Testimonials: Stories are an incredibly effective way to impact people’s opinions or ideas on a topic. When people share their lived experiences, it can have a huge impact on how participants feel about folks in the role of the storyteller. Most people don’t get to hear firsthand accounts of what addiction is like, what it feels like to have the government tell you your child is not safe with you, what it feels like to open your home to a child you’ve never met (or to watch them return to a parent you hope will be kind and safe). Videos and panels are ways to create affective shifts and achieve values objectives.

Simulation games and roleplaying activities: (different from a simulation or roleplay) When participants are assigned a role or set of life circumstances and need to navigate a particular daily life activity with the challenges and circumstances their character faces, we can often simulate the challenge of being in that circumstance. This can build empathy for folks we work with who live within those same constraints. This includes activities like “In Her Shoes,” or games where the outcome at every point is determined by the life experiences that were assigned to you at the beginning. These activities are much more structured than simulations or role plays where participants can say whatever they like as a character. The simulation game or activity typically forces choices between pre-determined options, and the participant isn’t trying to demonstrate or practice a skill, rather the focus is on experiencing a particular circumstance that might be common for folks they often work with (e.g., applying for financial benefits, taking public transportation to get to an appointment with three children under 5, being a young adult in foster care, etc.).

Using credibility (e.g. who will they listen to?): When we can use video clips (or quotes) from folks who have a lot of credibility with our participants, their endorsement of a set of views, beliefs or practices can go a long way. Participants may or may not listen to us but may place a lot of value on a particular leader or celebrity or group. Does NICWA endorse this practice? Did Brene Brown do a talk about it? Is there a video of the leading scientist discussing the impact? These may ‘hit home’ much more than a trainer saying the same thing.

Talking “as-if”: We may know that practice in the field (or caregiving in most homes) often doesn’t look like we want it to. We can still take care to describe the practice in great detail, as if it were often or usually true. This gives participants a repeated roadmap and expectation that there are people making this work. It gives folks who are interested in making a change some hope that it’s possible (along with offering knowledge and skills to get them there).

What doesn’t generally work:

You’re wrong: Activities that make people feel “wrong” or that make people defend their behavior are ineffective (at best). Look closely at the activities and discussions around your values objectives. If there are places where participants are likely to be pulled into arguing for the status quo, consider revising these. Always acknowledge the barriers that may be getting in the way of folks doing better work (these can’t become excuses, but we have to acknowledge reality). Then think about what we can do.

Moralizing: Participants want to see themselves as good people, who do good. And it’s unlikely that any of them came to their role or this training with evil intentions. Training can never leave folks with the impression that we think “if you were really a good person then you would…” While it’s fair to recognize the negative impact that some behaviors or practices might have, we should not imply that anyone showed up with bad intentions, or that their behavior is evidence of their moral insufficiency.

Data and statistics: These are helpful once folks have come to value something, but when data don’t support someone’s existing beliefs, they are typically not accepted by that person (at least not initially). There is a lot of research on this topic. Data are great at making a case to neutral folks, and helpful at honing motivation in folks who already believe or feel a particular way. But they’re not that helpful in changing minds, so not particularly effective to support your values objectives. Save the data review for after the story/endorsement/other activities that help folks make that values shift. 

Practice plus reflection plus feedback (simulation and roleplay): People learn skills by trying them out. Simulation and roleplay are the two main ways that skills can be practiced in their entirety. Activities that ask them to reflect on specific aspects of how they performed or would perform a skill can increase skill development. Feedback from an experienced facilitator, delivered in ways that feel safe and supportive, will further the impact of practice and reflection.

Scaffolding: Most skills that we would like our participants to learn are made up of many smaller skills and take a lot of time and repetition to do well. Practice without taking the time to build up these smaller skills, and to understand when and why they’re used, is often not effective. We must often design a series of activities that lead up to a simulation or roleplay.

Direct instruction: It’s not enough to describe what a skill should look like; we must provide direct instruction about the skill whenever we believe that a good chunk of our participants don’t already have the skill mastered. For instance, telling folks to engage with parents respectfully, or to involve children in decision-making is not helpful if we don’t discuss the main components of these skills, provide examples, dissect real-world challenges, and have people try out the approaches we have taught. We must break down the skill and give some direction as to what the real-world behavior actually looks and sounds like.

Demonstration: People benefit from seeing the skill used in a realistic way. How does the person in the video respond when the child doesn’t comply the first time? How does the caseworker use silence or normalizing when the parent denies having any ideas about how to address the problem? Participants deserve to see the skill and to see it in a context that’s not the best-case scenario. It can be helpful to pair a demonstration video with a critique, so that participants who are still weighing their motivation to use the skill can put their concerns out into the open and have others respond to them.

What doesn’t generally work: Throwing people into practice without providing activities to model the skill and develop some critical thinking about when and how to use it. If participants can practice the skill with no instruction, they are simply repeating what they already know, and not developing any new skills. If they can’t, more practice without instruction won’t help. Scaffolding must be built in, as well as some mechanism for folks to reflect and/or receive feedback that loops back to the instruction related to what the skill should look like and why.

The next step, following identification of the learning objectives, possibly a high-level outline, and some reflection about what types of activities might support the objectives and goal, is to create an in-depth outline (see Appendix H: Example Outline).

This outline will describe the training from opening to closing. The outline should show each section of the training, the learning objective(s) supported, ideas about what type of activities will be used, and an estimate of how long the segment will take. It will also budget time for breaks (typically two 10-minute breaks per three hours of webinar; in-person training sometimes uses one 15-minute break for every three hours). Generating this in-depth outline requires thinking about each objective and how best to support it.

It’s important that the training is engaging and flows coherently from start to finish. Review your outline – thinking about the activities you selected – and consider whether you’ve met the following criteria:

• All (or nearly all) of the activities and content advance the learning objectives.
• Engagement is frequent and periodic, not just at the end of a long block of information.
• Engagement happens in a variety of ways and with a variety of modalities and using different sized groups for collaboration. Video, audio, instructor-led or participant-led, direct application, brainstorming, compare/contrast, roleplay, simulation, large group, small group, pairs, individual reflection, tactile or sensory, read/write, visual/special, etc.
• Each activity has enough time allotted to provide instructions, answer clarifying questions, do the activity, and discuss/debrief/recap.

Sending the Outline for Feedback
The curriculum designer should send the in-depth outline to the training team for feedback. The curriculum designer might consider sending along a structured tool to receive feedback, so that the team knows what specific considerations it should weigh in on. Another helpful tool to send along with the in-depth outline is the curriculum guidelines. Both the training team and the curriculum developer should review the outline with these in mind.

Creating the Major Activities
At this point, you have all the building blocks that will go into your draft curriculum and have received feedback on your in-depth outline. Rather than starting at the beginning and writing the entire training, we recommend developing the largest activities on your outline first, along with the handouts, videos, or other materials you anticipate needing to create. This allows you to send these pieces to the training team for feedback early, since they are the parts of your curriculum most likely to need significant revision. Case scenarios, the questions we ask about them and the talking points/debrief following an activity often take multiple rounds of revision, and it’s good to start that process early.

As you develop your main activities, make sure you provide written instructions to participants and facilitators for all activities that require more than a sentence or so of explanation. Review instructions to make sure they are clear and concise, and that they can be provided in writing to virtual participants.

Also consider whether they will be at the right level of difficulty for most participants. If resources, information, or prior practice (scaffolding) are needed, ensure this is accounted for in your training outline.

Remember to incorporate and consider the curriculum guidelines. Application specific to activities and to overall curriculum is addressed briefly in the sections below. 

Trauma-Informed, Antiracist, Anti-Oppressive Curricula
All activities and interactions within a curriculum should be trauma informed. This is especially important when the topic of the training is not trauma, because it models that considering trauma is the default approach, we all take to this work. For some considerations on what this means, see:

Appendix M: Trauma-Informed Principles (CDC and SAMHSA)

Appendix N: Trauma-Informed Trainings

All activities and interactions within a curriculum should be antiracist and anti-oppressive. This is especially important when the topic of the training is not about race or oppression, because it models that considering racism, oppression, and cultural strengths and preferences is the default approach we all take to this work. For some considerations on what this means, see:

Appendix O: Creating Antiracist and Anti-Oppressive Curricula

Appendix P: Indigenization of Learning and Skill Development
An example of a framework for understanding families and children involved with child welfare (across our participant’s roles) that is trauma-informed and centers Indigenous knowledge and ways of being is the Indigenous Connectedness Framework, developed by Dr. Jessica Saniguq Ullrich, PhD. Integrating this framework, or other culturally relevant ways of understanding children, their families, and their paths toward healing, into activities or discussions can support our goals in both regards.

Appendix Q: Indigenous Connectedness Framework
Send along the major activities, along with instructions, debrief questions/answers/talking points, and any accompanying handouts to the training team for feedback. Consider providing them with a tool to structure their feedback, including the curriculum guidelines.

Modifications for eLearning
When the training will be an eLearning, the curriculum designer may still need to develop handouts, scenarios, or specific content related to activities. These should be developed and reviewed as above. It is important to work in collaboration with the instructional designer, who can advise of any technical issues that will impact the activity and help the curriculum designers select the best type of activity to support the objective within this modality.

Creating the full Draft Curriculum
By this point, you have developed a detailed outline which identifies activities that support your learning objectives. You have developed drafts of your main activities, handouts, and other parts of the curriculum that will support instruction and received feedback from the training team.

You have considered how to best support learning, ease of facilitation, and how to embody the curriculum principles.

You are now ready to develop the full draft curriculum and participant guide.

Use the curriculum template as you create your full draft curriculum, to document your talking points, critical questions, activity instructions, etc. The template supports ease of facilitation, makes it easy to find particular types of information about a course, and supports the ability of federal reviewers to make reimbursement determinations (so that we get the maximum allowable funding for each course).

See Appendix I: Alliance Facilitator Guide Template (LINK)

In most cases, trainings include PowerPoint slides, which serve as visual guides to the facilitator and participants throughout the training. Information on visual design and branding is included in chapter 5.

At a minimum, the opening of a training event should include:

• A territorial acknowledgment (see Appendix Q: Territorial Acknowledgments)
• Introduction of the Facilitator that includes preferred pronouns
• Brief overview of the structure of the training (length/stop times, breaks, materials) 
• Brief overview of the goals or learning objectives
• For in-person trainings, any information about restrooms, eating areas, etc. that participants need to be comfortable throughout the training

Most trainings will also benefit from:

• Participant introductions (invite people to provide pronouns, if comfortable and provide an opportunity to share something about self/content/etc.)
• An initial activity (short or more involved) that facilitates human connection and begins to build trust between participants
• Expectations for the training (provided by facilitator or generated by the group)

Watch out for boring openings. Participants should be doing something within 5 minutes of the training start time. A short ‘hook’ is often used – this is a quick interaction that introduces participants to the main problems the training will help with. It’s often something they may be able to respond better to, work out or solve at the end of the training.

At a minimum the closing should include:

• A review (preferably active) of what should have been achieved by the training
• Thank participants for their time/effort/attention
• Information about how to complete the evaluation

Most trainings will also benefit from:

• Activities that allow participants to apply what they’ve learned
• Time for planning or reflection (paired, individual, etc.)
• Information about how to continue to learn or get support (coaching sessions, staffing, other trainings)

If you are struggling with any aspect of design during this period (from in-depth outline to first full draft curriculum), one source of support is the Instructional Design team. They hold expertise in visual design, but also in designing activities for adult learners in general and can be helpful at any point as you build your training.

A written draft for every eLearning should be created to allow all team members to provide feedback. All the audio and text that will be used in the eLearning should be included here is draft form. Larger activities (that you may have already created) are built into the draft curriculum (or referenced and attached). For example (insert the “Which Child Needs an Evaluation?” activity here). Reviewers and instructional designers should be able to read the draft curriculum and understand what learners will hear and read from start to finish. While this is a draft and open for feedback, the content and structure of the course from start to finish is captured within this document.

If there are visuals (diagrams, pictures, etc.) that the instructional design team may want to incorporate or reference, indicate that, and send and attach the files.

While participants in an asynchronous training (such as an eLearning) will not need a Participant Guide, the curriculum designer may develop a resource document that participants download and reference following the training.

Once the full draft curriculum is written, curriculum designers circulate it to the training team and use the agreed upon timeframe for each team member to provide any feedback. Tools are available to help reviewers give focused, organized feedback. Curriculum designers (in collaboration with instructional designers on some projects) review all feedback and make determinations about what changes and edits will improve the training and the learner’s experience. Review and feedback tools, and the process of determining what edits and changes to make, are discussed in chapter 6.

Aligning with CD Principles
The curriculum principles can be a helpful guide when designing activities, including scenarios. At the point of completing the initial curriculum draft (for live trainings or eLearnings), reviewers should be prompted to provide feedback on whether curriculum principles 1,2,3,4,7 and 8 are evidenced, and how.

Principle 5 (adult learning) is best evaluated by members of the training team with expertise in curriculum design. Principle 6 (use expertise) is built into the process and may or may not be apparent within the curriculum itself. Principle 9 (quality assurance) is designed and implemented in tandem with the training but isn’t generally apparent within the training curriculum.