Discussion: View Thread

Hi all,
Can any of you give me some input on JIT Teaching? I'm writing a paper
about what my co-author and I call "JIT Teaching" - an amalgam of
rapid-delivery techniques and action learning. Students work to solve an
actual business problem for a business client and receive knowledge and
skill training as they need it. The course is not strictly a project
course, however, but is designed to teach about quality assurance and teams
via working on an actual reengineering problem in a project group. So the
purpose of the course is not so much to give students a chance to apply
everything they have learned in the business program to an actual project,
but on learning about specific topics by solving an actual business problem
that requires students to learn about these topics. I hope my distinction
here is clear.

Are you or any of your colleagues teaching courses like this? If so, would
you share with me your perspective on the delivery and conduct of the
course or put me in touch with others who could do so? I'm interested in
knowing how you structure the course (e.g., how much specific teaching do
you build in versus how willing are you to let the project determine what
material is covered) and whether you believe it is a successful teaching
approach.

Thanks!
Carol Watson, Ph.D.
Department of Management and Human Resources
College of Business Administration
Rider University
Lawrenceville, NJ 08648

This is the University of Phoenix model for courses, including online
courses.

Each course has an applied group project.

Each group project is an application of the concepts taught during the
course.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carol Watson, Ph.D." <watson@RIDER.EDU>
To: <MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2000 11:29 AM
Subject: JIT Teaching


> Hi all,
> Can any of you give me some input on JIT Teaching? I'm writing a paper
> about what my co-author and I call "JIT Teaching" - an amalgam of
> rapid-delivery techniques and action learning. Students work to solve an
> actual business problem for a business client and receive knowledge and
> skill training as they need it. The course is not strictly a project
> course, however, but is designed to teach about quality assurance and
teams
> via working on an actual reengineering problem in a project group. So the
> purpose of the course is not so much to give students a chance to apply
> everything they have learned in the business program to an actual project,
> but on learning about specific topics by solving an actual business
problem
> that requires students to learn about these topics. I hope my distinction
> here is clear.
>
> Are you or any of your colleagues teaching courses like this? If so,
would
> you share with me your perspective on the delivery and conduct of the
> course or put me in touch with others who could do so? I'm interested in
> knowing how you structure the course (e.g., how much specific teaching do
> you build in versus how willing are you to let the project determine what
> material is covered) and whether you believe it is a successful teaching
> approach.
>
> Thanks!
> Carol Watson, Ph.D.
> Department of Management and Human Resources
> College of Business Administration
> Rider University
> Lawrenceville, NJ 08648
>

I would suggest that you talk to Robert Osborne at Business Breakthroughs,
rosborne@busbreaks.com Rob is very busy in the industrial marketplace
teaching business management skills. His RapidCAP Cycle Programs are
designed to help make JIT decisions. (www.busbreaks.com)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carol Watson, Ph.D." <watson@RIDER.EDU>
To: <MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2000 2:29 PM
Subject: JIT Teaching


> Hi all,
> Can any of you give me some input on JIT Teaching? I'm writing a paper
> about what my co-author and I call "JIT Teaching" - an amalgam of
> rapid-delivery techniques and action learning. Students work to solve an
> actual business problem for a business client and receive knowledge and
> skill training as they need it. The course is not strictly a project
> course, however, but is designed to teach about quality assurance and
teams
> via working on an actual reengineering problem in a project group. So the
> purpose of the course is not so much to give students a chance to apply
> everything they have learned in the business program to an actual project,
> but on learning about specific topics by solving an actual business
problem
> that requires students to learn about these topics. I hope my distinction
> here is clear.
>
> Are you or any of your colleagues teaching courses like this? If so,
would
> you share with me your perspective on the delivery and conduct of the
> course or put me in touch with others who could do so? I'm interested in
> knowing how you structure the course (e.g., how much specific teaching do
> you build in versus how willing are you to let the project determine what
> material is covered) and whether you believe it is a successful teaching
> approach.
>
> Thanks!
> Carol Watson, Ph.D.
> Department of Management and Human Resources
> College of Business Administration
> Rider University
> Lawrenceville, NJ 08648
>

In a message dated 1/27/00 2:41:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, watson@RIDER.EDU
writes:

> Can any of you give me some input on JIT Teaching? I'm writing a paper
> about what my co-author and I call "JIT Teaching" - an amalgam of
> rapid-delivery techniques and action learning. Students work to solve an

JIT (job instruction training) is a recognized training methodology. It was
developed by the military during WWII to quickly train large numbers of
persons in complex tasks. It had four steps (and I'm doing this from memory,
so I may not be exactly right on the details):

1. Instructor runs through task quickly, pointing out desired end result and
major steps.

2. Instructor demonstrated each task step by step, emphasizing crucial
points.

3. Trainees demonstrate tasks step by step, each explaining each step as
they go and receiving guidance from instructors.

4. Trainees repeat as instructor tapers off level of supervision as trainees
demonstrate increased competence.

It proved very effective and helped lead to the reconsideration of
instructional techniques that has led to our contemporary training
technologies.



Frank Bell
Technical Trainer
Checkpoint Systems (www.checkpointacpg.com)
101 Wolf Drive
Thorofare, N. J. 08086
email: frankwbell@aol.com
http://members.aol.com/frankwbell

JIT, also referred to as Just In Time teaching, is most often
training, not education, and is designed to satisfy an immediate
need to eliminate some ignorance. The value may not necessarily
be long lived because of its specificity to the immediate situation.
JIT is often used in the military, especially in hardware maintenance
situations.
Problem Based Learning can often be education, not just training.
In many cases, the problem situation is used to investigate
a general principle of education, and then the generalization
of what has been learned is discussed.
One might be compared to giving a man a fish, the other teaching
him how to fish.

Jim Dobbins

--- Original Message ---
Frank Bell <FRANKWBELL@AOL.COM> Wrote on
Fri, 28 Jan 2000 10:53:51 EST
------------------
In a message dated 1/27/00 2:41:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
watson@RIDER.EDU
writes:

> Can any of you give me some input on JIT Teaching? I'm writing
a paper
> about what my co-author and I call "JIT Teaching" - an amalgam
of
> rapid-delivery techniques and action learning. Students work
to solve an

JIT (job instruction training) is a recognized training methodology.
It was
developed by the military during WWII to quickly train large
numbers of
persons in complex tasks. It had four steps (and I'm doing this
from memory,
so I may not be exactly right on the details):

1. Instructor runs through task quickly, pointing out desired
end result and
major steps.

2. Instructor demonstrated each task step by step, emphasizing
crucial
points.

3. Trainees demonstrate tasks step by step, each explaining
each step as
they go and receiving guidance from instructors.

4. Trainees repeat as instructor tapers off level of supervision
as trainees
demonstrate increased competence.

It proved very effective and helped lead to the reconsideration
of
instructional techniques that has led to our contemporary training
technologies.



Frank Bell
Technical Trainer
Checkpoint Systems (www.checkpointacpg.com)
101 Wolf Drive
Thorofare, N. J. 08086
email: frankwbell@aol.com
http://members.aol.com/frankwbell


-----
Sent using MailStart.com ( http://MailStart.Com/welcome.html )
The FREE way to access your mailbox via any web browser, anywhere!

Jim and Frank,

>> Can any of you give me some input on JIT Teaching?

Although no one doing this research uses the term JIT, I think that the
idea of "minimalist training" is certainly relevant. John Carroll has done
some very interesting work in this area, much of based on solid empirical
research. I would recommend his book:

The Nurnberg Funnel : Designing Minimalist Instruction for Practical
Computer Skill (Technical Communications Series) by John Millar Carroll (1990)

Just a thought!

Ken



~~~~~~~~~

Kenneth G. Brown, Ph.D.
Dept of Management and Organizations
108 Pappajohn Business Building
University of Iowa
Iowa City, IA 52242
PH: 319.335.3812 FX: 319.335.1956
HTTP://www.biz.uiowa.edu/faculty/kbrown
~~~~~~~~~

Carol - This sounds very much like case teaching. Perhaps the only
difference is that the "case" is the actual problem. What would make it
much more poerful, in my opinion, would be to locate another case that
deals with a similar problem, and teach that to the gathered multitude,
and then develop the analogy to the current situation in the firm.

Tim Edlund, Morgan State Univ.

On Thu, 27 Jan 2000, Carol Watson, Ph.D. wrote:

> Hi all,
> Can any of you give me some input on JIT Teaching? I'm writing a paper
> about what my co-author and I call "JIT Teaching" - an amalgam of
> rapid-delivery techniques and action learning. Students work to solve an
> actual business problem for a business client and receive knowledge and
> skill training as they need it. The course is not strictly a project
> course, however, but is designed to teach about quality assurance and teams
> via working on an actual reengineering problem in a project group. So the
> purpose of the course is not so much to give students a chance to apply
> everything they have learned in the business program to an actual project,
> but on learning about specific topics by solving an actual business problem
> that requires students to learn about these topics. I hope my distinction
> here is clear.
>
> Are you or any of your colleagues teaching courses like this? If so, would
> you share with me your perspective on the delivery and conduct of the
> course or put me in touch with others who could do so? I'm interested in
> knowing how you structure the course (e.g., how much specific teaching do
> you build in versus how willing are you to let the project determine what
> material is covered) and whether you believe it is a successful teaching
> approach.
>
> Thanks!
> Carol Watson, Ph.D.
> Department of Management and Human Resources
> College of Business Administration
> Rider University
> Lawrenceville, NJ 08648
>

Tim, Carol,
Good ideas.
In the RealSearch approach used by Rick Dove (www.parshift.com) an external
case is used (does not have to be similar as long as the principles are
there) then a case from inside that represents a success. Once the
workgroup sees the principles at work in both, they are ready to apply them
to their "real" situation. The application takes two tries. First they
learn that they learned the principles but not how to apply them. Second
is a re-discussion of the two cases. Third, they then learn how to apply
them. I "rode shotgun" on four client engagements with Rick and saw
firsthand that it really works, provided, of course, that the majority
wanted to learn in the first place.


>Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 15:20:47 -0500
>From: Tim Edlund <tedlund@MORGAN.EDU>
>Subject: Re: JIT Teaching
>
>Carol - This sounds very much like case teaching. Perhaps the only
>difference is that the "case" is the actual problem. What would make it
>much more poerful, in my opinion, would be to locate another case that
>deals with a similar problem, and teach that to the gathered multitude,
>and then develop the analogy to the current situation in the firm.
>
>Tim Edlund, Morgan State Univ.
>
>On Thu, 27 Jan 2000, Carol Watson, Ph.D. wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> Can any of you give me some input on JIT Teaching? I'm writing a paper
>> about what my co-author and I call "JIT Teaching" - an amalgam of
>> rapid-delivery techniques and action learning. Students work to solve an
>> actual business problem for a business client and receive knowledge and
>> skill training as they need it. The course is not strictly a project
>> course, however, but is designed to teach about quality assurance and teams
>> via working on an actual reengineering problem in a project group. So the
>> purpose of the course is not so much to give students a chance to apply
>> everything they have learned in the business program to an actual project,
>> but on learning about specific topics by solving an actual business problem
>> that requires students to learn about these topics. I hope my distinction
>> here is clear.
>>
>> Are you or any of your colleagues teaching courses like this? If so, would
>> you share with me your perspective on the delivery and conduct of the
>> course or put me in touch with others who could do so? I'm interested in
>> knowing how you structure the course (e.g., how much specific teaching do
>> you build in versus how willing are you to let the project determine what
>> material is covered) and whether you believe it is a successful teaching
>> approach.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Carol Watson, Ph.D.
>> Department of Management and Human Resources
>> College of Business Administration
>> Rider University
>> Lawrenceville, NJ 08648

Jack Ring
Innovation Management
32712 N. 70th St., Snottsdale, AZ 85262-7143
Office) 480-488-4615, Cell) 602.369.4615, Fax) 480-488-4616
A system must be designed not for the situation that exists but for the
situation that will exist once the system is activated.

Ken,
Thanks for your response. I've never heard of this, but will look it up.
It does sound like it might be similar.

Carol

At 02:38 PM 1/28/00 -0600, you wrote:
>Jim and Frank,
>
>>> Can any of you give me some input on JIT Teaching?
>
>Although no one doing this research uses the term JIT, I think that the
>idea of "minimalist training" is certainly relevant. John Carroll has done
>some very interesting work in this area, much of based on solid empirical
>research. I would recommend his book:
>
>The Nurnberg Funnel : Designing Minimalist Instruction for Practical
>Computer Skill (Technical Communications Series) by John Millar Carroll
(1990)
>
>Just a thought!
>
>Ken
>
>
>
>~~~~~~~~~
>
>Kenneth G. Brown, Ph.D.
>Dept of Management and Organizations
>108 Pappajohn Business Building
>University of Iowa
>Iowa City, IA 52242
>PH: 319.335.3812 FX: 319.335.1956
>HTTP://www.biz.uiowa.edu/faculty/kbrown
>~~~~~~~~~
>