How Dialogue Education is Different...

As you read through this chart comparing Traditional Training, Dialogue Education,
and Non-Formal approaches, consider:

1. What resonates with your experience?
2. What would you disagree with?
3. What new questions do you have about Dialogue Education and learning?

Email your reflections and questions! We would love to hear from you.

printable version

	Traditional Training	Dialogue Education	Non-Formal Education
Typical Methods Used	Lectures, Power Point presentations, sometimes questions and answers afterwards.	Learning tasks where participants draw from their own experience, engage with new content, apply it and consider its application to their context.	Participatory methods involving simulations, games, group work, energizers, discussions.
Monologue vs. Dialogue	Monologue (uni-directional sharing of information via lecture), sometimes Q&A afterwards	Dialogue amongst participants and with teacher throughout workshop.	Dialogue between participants.
Accountability	Accountability to Teacher	Mutual accountability between teacher and participants and between participants	Accountability to participants needs
Who's Knowledge Counts	Teacher's knowledge	Everyone's knowledge	Learners' knowledge
Deductive vs. Inductive Knowledge	Favours deductive knowledge	Supports both deductive/inductive knowledge	Favors inductive knowledge
Content vs. Process	Focus on delivering content	Content through process	Focus on process
Learning Styles	Primarily auditory, some visual (PowerPoint)	Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic	Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic
Learning Domains	Strong for teaching in cognitive learning domain	Strong for cognitive, affective, and psychomotor learning domains	Better at teaching in affective and psychomotor domains
Types of Objectives	Clear teaching objectives	Clear achievement-based objectives (ABOs)	Clear learning objectives
Learner's Experience	Unless dynamic speaker, it can be experienced as boring, but rigorous	Engaging AND rigorous	Fun, but sometimes lacks clarity on what has been learned.
Evaluation Methods	Evaluation in academic settings is done through testing (but often not possible in many adult learning settings). Feedback on presentations.	Evaluation embedded in achievement of ABOs observed during workshops. Quality of participation as judged by participants and facilitator. Tracking of transfer and impact.	Evaluation through impressions of learners' experience, sometimes through demonstration skills.
Strengths / Weaknesses	Content rich. Considered more academic, rigorous, and professional. Requires little preparation / but privileges auditory learners and leads to low sense of ownership and learning.	Can cover a lot of content in a short time and at a deeper level through praxis. High ownership of learning process by participants. Takes time to prepare well.	Process is very participatory and engaging. High sense of ownership of process. Ambiguous results. Sometimes perception of "sharing of ignorance" amongst participants.