technical working group 3 innovative training ... · technical working group 3 innovative training...
TRANSCRIPT
1 | P a g e
Technical Working Group 3 Innovative training infrastructures, materials
and methods
Final Deliverable
1. Document details
Authors Simonas Gaušas and Elžbieta Jašinskaitė (Visionary Analytics)
Creation Date June 2017
Date of Last
Revision
September 2017
Description This report concerns the final deliverable of TWG3.
The report presents an overview of the main types of training infrastructures, training
materials and training methods used in the 27 BUS Pillar II and Horizon 2020 Construction
skills projects. This overview includes project good practice examples and provides further
suggestions for improving the main types of training infrastructures, materials and methods
described.
This report is built on knowledge gathered by the TWG as well as the database on training
activities which contains contributions from all 27 relevant projects.
2 | P a g e
Contents
2. Introduction to TWG3 - Background .............................................................................. 3
2.1. Objectives of the TWG .............................................................................................. 3
2.2. Typology of topics for the TWG .................................................................................... 3
2.3. Links between TWG1 and the other TWGs ........................................................................ 5
2.4. Sources for this report ............................................................................................... 5
3. Training infrastructures ............................................................................................. 7
3.1. Definition .............................................................................................................. 7
3.2. Major characteristics ................................................................................................ 7
3.3. Innovativeness ....................................................................................................... 13
3.4. Assessment & suggestions .......................................................................................... 14
3.5. Recommendations ................................................................................................... 15
4. Training materials .................................................................................................. 16
4.1. Definition ............................................................................................................. 16
4.2. Major characteristics ............................................................................................... 16
4.3. Innovativeness ....................................................................................................... 21
4.4. Assessment & suggestions .......................................................................................... 22
4.5. Recommendations ................................................................................................... 23
5. Training methods ................................................................................................... 25
5.1. Definition ............................................................................................................. 25
5.2. Major characteristics ............................................................................................... 25
5.3. Innovativeness ....................................................................................................... 32
5.4. Assessment & suggestions .......................................................................................... 34
5.5. Recommendations ................................................................................................... 35
3 | P a g e
2. Introduction to TWG3 - Background
The overall aim of this Technical Working Group 3 (TWG3) was to exchange information between project
coordinators and partners regarding innovative training. The TWG3 focused on innovative training
infrastructures (i.e. where training takes place), training materials (i.e. tools used for delivering training)
and training methods (i.e. techniques or approaches how training is delivered) used within BUILD UP Skills
Pillar II and Horizon 2020 Construction Skills projects.
2.1. Objectives of the TWG
The objectives of this Technical Working Group were the following:
1. Discuss the particular features of innovative training infrastructures, training materials and
training methods.
2. Map out the major difficulties encountered and the best results achieved during the course of
the projects with regard to each topic.
3. Identify and share good practices among projects. Sharing of such practices (above) could address
difficulties and/ or further amplify project achievements.
2.2. Typology of topics for the TWG
Discussions within the group focused on specifics, experiences and lessons learnt in relation to the
following types and subtypes of innovative training:
• Training infrastructures (i.e. where training takes place, where it is delivered):
o Classrooms including auditoriums or conference rooms (large- to medium-size rooms),
seminar rooms (small-size rooms), audio-visual equipped rooms for audio/visual and
Internet-based instruction and “dry laboratories”, i.e. media based laboratories where
analyses are done on a computer-generated model(s) to simulate a phenomenon in the
physical reality (e.g. electronics)
o Workshops for simulation of different work tasks in construction (e.g. insulation
module) usually located in the premises of the training centre
o In-company/ practical training premises including company production facilities (e.g.
construction site, factory, production line) and mobile training (e.g. training bus)
o Computer-based training (i.e. training via PCs, tablets, smartphones, etc.)
o Online training or internet-based e-learning, i.e. training via webinars, learning
management systems like Moodle
o Study visits
• Training materials (i.e. tools used for delivering training, how training is supported):
o Didactic materials (i.e. materials used in specific training activities) including audio-
visual materials such as (short) films, power Point Presentations or similar (e.g. Prezi),
flash cards, case studies/ situation analysis, pictures, story boards, drawings, diagrams,
demonstrative objects (e.g. small-scale building systems for smoke or pressure tests)
and flip charts, post its, stickers
o Manuals including reference manuals (i.e. books in which content and/or training
methods can be found, usually given to participants after having attended training) and
training manuals (i.e. books in which content and/or training methods can be found
usually used by trainers to prepare/ facilitate their training)
o Software tools including computer simulation programmes, mobile applications and e-
timetables
• Training methods (i.e. techniques or approaches how training is delivered):
4 | P a g e
o Classroom-based training led/ facilitated by trainer/ instructor including passive –
lecture or seminar based instruction and interactive – group or peer-assisted learning,
i.e. group of learners work on the same topic/ problem/ task/ etc. (e.g. suitable for
training demanding change in behaviour of a learner, for example, when training for
cross-craft understanding)
o ICT-based training techniques including computer-based training programme (i.e. self-
study or instructor-facilitated self-study) and internet-based training programme (i.e.
e-learning or distance training) delivered via any type of ICT device
o Mixed classroom- and ICT-based training including blended learning (i.e. a formal
education program in which a student learns at least in part through delivery of content
and instruction via digital and online media with some element of student control over
time, place, path, or pace; the focus is on engaging the learner and deepen his/ her
experience by offering individualised involvement at their own time, place, path and
pace) and flipped classroom (i.e. a type of blended learning, with the help of ICT
student prepares for the next day’s lessons and activities before entering the
classroom, so that face-to-face class time is spent more interactively)
o Hands-on or direct practical training:
▪ Apprenticeship (a systematic long-term training alternating periods at the
workplace and in an education and training institution or training centre,
defined in law, an apprentice is contractually linked to the employer and
receives remuneration, an employer assumes responsibility for the company-
based part of the programme, leads to a formal qualification usually at EQF 3-
4 levels, lasts up to 4 years)
▪ Work-based training (similar to apprenticeship, BUT: can take place at the
workplace or in a vocational education and training institution, is not legally
defined, learner is usually not an employee and does not receive
remuneration, foresees limited responsibility of an employer for the company-
based part of the programme, may lead to formal or non-formal qualification
usually at EQF 3-4 levels, lasts up to 1 year)
▪ Traineeship (similar to work-based learning, BUT: is usually non-formal, may
not be obligatory, can be found at any EQF level)
▪ Internship (similar to work-based learning, BUT: carried out to receive credit,
usually for EQF levels 5-6, i.e. higher education)
▪ Job-rotation (typically for existing employees, a planned change of tasks or
positions within the same organisation and eventually a return to the original
task/ position)
▪ Job-shadowing (allows you to follow an employee on the job to experience
real, day-to-day work in a specific occupation or industry, most common for
students, ranges from a few hours to a few days)
o Hands-off or indirect guidance-based training:
▪ Coaching (training or development in which a coach supports a learner in
achieving a specific personal or professional goal, short-term and usually has
a set duration, more structured with regular meetings)
▪ Mentoring (relationship in which a more experienced or more knowledgeable
person helps to guide a less experienced/ knowledgeable person, more long-
5 | P a g e
term, takes a broader view of the person (broader goals such as preparation
for future roles, more informal with irregular need-based meetings)
2.3. Links between TWG1 and the other TWGs
The themes and discussions within the four TWGs which were moderated during the period from the 7th
EU Exchange Meeting in January 2016 to the 10th EU Exchange Meeting in May 2017 are interlinked. Market
acceptance figures as the most prominent link between TWG3 and TWG4. At the beginning (during the 7th
EU Exchange Meeting) TWG3 had a sub-group on financial, non-financial and legal incentives to stimulate
the demand for training among workers. It was eventually merged with TWG4 on market acceptance
starting from the 8th EU Exchange Meeting. Links between other TWGs are less direct.
2.4. Sources for this report
The main source of this report is a database on training activities of 27 BUILD UP Skills Pillar II and Horizon
2020 Construction skills projects. It is a key result of TWG3 and one of the key deliverables of “Support
for BUILD UP Skills EU exchanges and analysis on construction skills” project.
The database is based on two surveys, namely a general survey and a specific survey, carried out in 2016-
2017. The general survey collected general data on the training materials, methods and infrastructures
used in projects. The specific survey gathered more in-depth information on the main types of training
infrastructures, training materials and training methods used within these projects (overall three types
per project). This resulted in the database on training activities and provides a basis for this report (see
also figure below).
Figure 1: composition of the database on training activities of 27 BUS and H2020 projects
Source: Authors
This report presents a detailed overview of the following sub-types of innovative training most often
used in projects:
• Training infrastructures: (1) Workshops for simulation of different work tasks in construction (e.g.
insulation module) usually located in the premises of the training centre; (2) traditional
classroom training that takes place in seminar rooms (small-size rooms); and (3) in-company/
6 | P a g e
practical training in company production facilities (e.g. construction site, factory, production
line).
• Training materials: (1) Didactic materials; (2) training and reference manuals; and (3) software.
• Training methods: (1) Classroom-based interactive training led/ facilitated by trainer/ instructor;
(2) Work-based hands-on or direct practical training; and (3) Mixed classroom and ICT training.
Other sources for the report include summaries of TWG3 discussions that took place between the 7th EU
Exchange Meeting in January 2016 to the 10th EU Exchange Meeting in May 2017, presentations and reports
from separate projects and authors’ own elaborations.
7 | P a g e
3. Training infrastructures
3.1. Definition
Training infrastructures refer to various locations where training is delivered, e.g. classrooms, workshops
or other facilities. Suitable training infrastructures make training more effective by enabling particular
types of training activities and providing trainees with a basic space of interaction. This report focuses on
the following three types of training infrastructures (85% of all BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020
Construction skills projects used these types of infrastructures):
• Workshops for simulation of different work tasks in construction (e.g. insulation module)
usually located in the premises of the training centre1 refer to sites that were specifically set-
up according to training needs. They contain the necessary training materials, equipment or task
simulation models and enable hands-on practical training.
• Traditional classroom training that takes place in seminar rooms (small-size rooms)2 is a
classic type of infrastructure. Trainees attend classes and learn from qualified instructors.
• In-company/ practical training: company production facilities (e.g. construction site,
factory, production line)3 relies on already existing facilities where regular company employees
perform their daily activities. Trainees work alongside regular employees and use the materials
and equipment which the company provides.
There are also other types of training infrastructures, namely other types of traditional classroom training
(i.e. auditoriums or conference rooms, audio-visual equipped rooms and “dry laboratories”)4, mobile in-
company/ practical training, computer-based training, online or internet based e-learning and study visits.
However, these are not extensively covered in this report as they have been used only in small number of
cases (15% of all projects) or have not been used in relevant projects at all (e.g. mobile in-company
training or study visits). Thus further sections of the report centre on the three training infrastructures
outlined above.
3.2. Major characteristics
The major characteristics of the training courses did not vary significantly between the different methods
used. However, some slight variations may be considered as relevant.
Seminar rooms and workshops were both equally used types of training infrastructures (37% of all projects
for both types). However, seminar rooms were available in slightly more countries than workshops:
seminar rooms were used in 18 countries, while workshops were used in 14 countries. Workshops were
slightly more widespread between Eastern and Southern European countries, while seminar rooms were
slightly more widespread between the Northern and Western European countries (see figure 1 and figure
2 below). In-company/ practical training was only used in three projects (11% of all projects) and likewise
was only available in three countries. Such data indicates that seminar rooms could be preferable to other
infrastructures in projects with international participants, while other types of infrastructures seem more
appropriate for national projects. The division between regions which used workshops and seminar rooms
could be due to multiple reasons such as different training priorities or different target group types and
thus may not be specified.
1 This type of training infrastructure was considered the main one in the following projects: I-TOWN, FORCE, WEQualify, Construye 2020, FORESEE, QUALITRAIN, CROSKILLS II, Train-to-NZEB, STAVEDU, LuxBuild. 2 This type of training infrastructure was considered the main one in the following projects: CROSSCRAFT, SWEBuild, UPSWING, ENERGOTRAIN, ENERPRO, N@W, QualiBuild, MEnS, BUILDEST II, ingREeS. 3 This type of training infrastructure was considered the main one in the following projects: QualiShell, BRICKS, BEET. 4 For definition of all types of training infrastructures see the database on training activities, sheet of general survey questionnaire.
8 | P a g e
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects; www.mapchart.net.
The main objective for all types of training infrastructures was said to be the development of specific/
technical knowledge and/ or skills (45% of all respondents selected this option). However, for projects
which used in-company training as their main type of infrastructure the development of specific/ technical
knowledge and/ or skills as a training objective was much higher than average (60% of all projects that
used this type of infrastructure, see graph 1 below). While this could suggest that in-company training is
preferable for this particular training objective, the data sample is too small to make any conclusive
assumptions. The share of respondents who used workshops as the main type of infrastructure for
development of specific/ technical knowledge and/ or skills was also quite high (50% of all projects that
used this type of infrastructure). However, workshops were also quite widely used for other training
objectives such as the development of soft/ basic knowledge and/ or skills (22% of all projects that used
this type of infrastructure) and attitudinal/ behaviour change (28% of all projects that used this type of
infrastructure). This demonstrates that workshops are well suited for a wide range of training objectives
without being limited to one particular training objective. Seminar rooms are also just as suitable for a
wide range of training objectives, but this type of infrastructure seems less favourable for development
of specific/ technical knowledge and/ or skills when compared to other types of training infrastructures.
Graph 1: Objectives for using different types of training infrastructures
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects.
22%
50%
0%
28%
0%
12%
41%
6%
29%
12%
20%
60%
20%
0% 0%0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Development of soft/basic knowledge and/
or skills
Development ofspecific/ technical
knowledge and/ or skills
Development ofmanagement/
supervisory knowledgeand/ or skills
Attitudinal/ behaviourchange
Other
Workshops
Seminar rooms
In-company training
Figure 1: Map of countries where seminar rooms were available as the main type of training infrastructure
Figure 2: Map of countries where workshops were available as the main type of training infrastructure
9 | P a g e
The level of progress of activities for the types of training infrastructures are illustrated by graph 2
below. The specific survey on the main types of training infrastructures was carried out in November 2016
– April 2016. This report presents the given situation of relevant projects at the time. Graphs below
indicate the extent to which training infrastructures were used in projects and thus, the extent to which
insights in this report are based on experiences in the field. Approximately half (48%) of all project
activities have been completed and the other half (48%) are still ongoing. For both main types of
infrastructures, namely workshops and seminar rooms, half of activities (50%) have been completed and
another half (50%) remain to be carried out. A bigger share of activities (67%) that use in-company training
as their main type of infrastructure have been completed.
Graph 2: Level of progress of activities for different types of training infrastructures
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects.
Seeing as an equal share of activities which use workshops and seminar rooms have been completed, the
number of people trained by using each type of infrastructure indicates their suitability for training large
numbers of people (see graph 3 below). Although the greatest numbers of people already trained were in
projects that used seminar rooms, the largest total number of people both trained and to be trained was
in projects that used workshops. Furthermore, projects that use workshops were identified to be planning
to train significantly larger numbers of people per project than projects which use other training
infrastructures. It may be concluded that workshops are more suitable than seminar rooms for training
large numbers of people. The lowest numbers of people both already trained and to be trained were said
to be in projects that used in-company training. Given the fact that only three projects used this type of
infrastructure, it is not surprising that these numbers are low. However, in-company training also displays
the lowest numbers of maximum number of people trained per single project when compared to other
training infrastructures. This demonstrates that this type of infrastructure is unsuitable for training large
numbers of people.
50%
40%
10%
0% 0%
50% 50%
0% 0% 0%
67%
33%
0% 0% 0%0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
All activities have beencompleted
Part activities havebeen completed
Activities have beenplanned, but not yet
started
Activities have not yetbeen planned
Other
Workshops
Seminar rooms
In-company training
10 | P a g e
Graph 3: Number of people (to be) trained for different types of training methods
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects.
The target group for the majority of training infrastructures (with a few single exceptions) was defined
by the following characteristics:
• Most trainees were workers/ technicians (63% of all training infrastructures)
• All or majority workers were aged 30-54
• All or majority were employed
• All or majority were nationals
• All or majority were experienced employees (working in the area for at least few years)
A notable difference regarding the type of target group was identified between projects that used
workshops and that used seminar rooms. While both types of infrastructures were mainly used to train
workers/ technicians, in workshops as many as 70% of trainees were said to be workers/technicians but
in seminar rooms only 50% of all trainees were said to be workers/ technicians. A considerable proportion
of trainees in seminar rooms were trainers (30%) and a fifth of all such projects (20%) indicated other
target group types, which were mainly further specified as multiple target group types (e.g. workers/
technicians and trainers). Such data demonstrates that workshops are preferable for a particular target
group, namely workers/ technicians, while seminar rooms are suitable for multiple target groups. More
specifically, seminar rooms seem better suited than workshops or in-company training for the training of
trainers. The Italian project I-TOWN is a perfect illustration of how workshops and seminar rooms may be
used to train different target groups. Using different types of training infrastructures for different target
groups is advantageous as this allows to meet specific training needs better. This good practice is
presented in the box below (see box 1).
1143
400
5142
24002003
675
2565
1200
426 248550 500
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Number of people,approximately, have been
trained so far
Highest number in project Number of people,approximately, planed to betrained during the remaining
time of project
Highest number in project
Workshops
Seminar rooms
In-company training
11 | P a g e
Box 1: Good practice example in using workshops and seminar rooms
The Italian BUS project I-TOWN used two
types of infrastructures, namely workshops
and seminar rooms. Workshops were set up in
various locations across Italy. The training
scheme was developed according to a three-
level approach where workers were
instructed on (1) the general concepts of
energy efficiency, (2) cross-craft
transferable knowledge and skills, and (3)
specific technical aspects relevant to
particular vocations (e.g. electricians,
construction workers, etc.). In most cases,
demo models for practising specific skills
were available. Such workshops may be considered as a good practice due to the following features:
• Training was based on workers’ training needs.
• Workers could familiarise with new materials and equipment in a secure environment under
trainer supervision.
• Demo models allowed workers to carry out complete tasks in short time periods.
• Demo models enabled workers to become familiar with a wide range of different situations that
could happen while working on-site.
• Workers gained both general and more specific skills.
• Workers had the chance to interacts with workers from other fields and exchange their
experiences.
•
The training of trainers was carried
out in seminar rooms. There were
three types of training pathways
available: (1) mechanical systems, (2)
electronic systems and (3)
construction. Trainers attended 4-
hour seminars and were instructed by
various field experts. The training of
trainers was divided into four
modules: basic training, process
training, product training and the
training of soft skills. These modules
were targeted towards instructing
trainers in diverse themes: e.g. basic
training was oriented towards general
knowledge and the overview of concepts in sustainable construction, while product training was more
specific and focused on particular construction techniques. In addition to traditional training via
lectures and seminars, training included discussions of case studies in working groups. Trainers who
already had previous knowledge on certain themes could choose to take a test and subsequently, attend
fewer courses. After the training sessions, most materials (PowerPoint slides, audio-visual materials
© I-TOWN Seminar training (2016). Used with permission from
Project Coordinator.
© I-TOWN Training Workshop (2016). Used with permission
from Project Coordinator.
12 | P a g e
etc.) were made available online for future reference on the I-TOWN e-learning platform5 or YouTube.
This may be considered a good practice because:
• Training was based on a well-developed strategy for trainers which was based on training needs
• Field experts provided trainers with knowledge based on actual working situations
• Training was highly individual and very flexible: trainers could choose between different pathways,
different modules and also the number of hours they wished to study
• Looking at various case studies allowed trainers to learn about very specific elements of sustainable
construction and gain a more in-depth understanding of relevant issues
• Group work allowed to discuss and discover common problems in training for sustainable
construction
• Having all the materials on-line encouraged self-learning and allowed better dissemination of
training materials
Source: Ente Senese Scuola Edile, Modulo buone pratiche I-TOWN, Modulo commune progetti BUILD UP Skills – BRICKS
e ITOWN; Formatore “EDILE”, Reggion Emilia 20 e 21 Ottobre 2016: http://www.bus-itown.eu/formazione-
formatori/2; BUILD UP Skills BUILD UP SKILLS I-TOWN, WP: Train the trainers, Deliverable: D3.2 Training scheme for
training the trainers “Piano formative per la formazione dei formatori”.
The training course for the majority of all training methods (with a few single exceptions) was defined
by the following characteristics:
• Most training courses were oriented towards building construction (45% of all courses).
• The duration of courses was shorter term.
• Training took place during work hours.
The proportions regarding the other thematic course categories varied between the different training
infrastructures (see graph 4 below). In-company training facilities were mainly used for training in building
construction and for almost no other thematic courses. Workshops were also used mainly for training in
building construction but other thematic courses were also made available. The most diverse types of
thematic courses were offered in seminar rooms. Based on this data, it could be assumed that both
workshops and in-company training facilities are suitable for covering a more narrow range of thematic
courses, while seminar rooms, on the contrary, are more suitable for a wider range of thematic courses.
Graph 4: Thematic course categories for different training methods
5 The e-learning platform may be accessed via this link: http://i-town.labelacademy.com/ .
50%
42%
75%
25%
33%
25%25% 25%
0%0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%Buildings
Energy systems
Renewables
13 | P a g e
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects.
Major characteristics of the courses and training did not differ significantly. From this data it may be
inferred that there are no training characteristics that would be specific to some particular type of training
infrastructure and that all analysed training infrastructures are equally suitable for training activities
within relevant projects.
3.3. Innovativeness
More than half of all respondents (59%) indicated that training infrastructures used at BUILD UP Skills
(Pillar II) projects were innovative. However, only workshops were said to be innovative by majority of
respondents that used this type of training infrastructure (90%). Other types of infrastructures were said
to be innovative by less than half of respondents who used them (40% for seminar rooms and 33% for in-
company training). Details for each type were as follows:
• Workshops were said to be innovative mostly because they enabled trainees to gain practical
experience in working with materials and equipment which had been previously unavailable. In
some cases such workshops included innovative demo models for training. Workshops were also
said to have been developed in order to accommodate to specific training needs of the
construction sector.
• Seminar rooms were said to be innovative by relatively few respondents. The main reasons for
identifying this type of infrastructure as innovative were due to interdisciplinary cross-craft
discussions, dissemination of field expert knowledge and, in some cases, combination of seminar
room facilities with e-learning.
• In-company training was said to be innovative by only one respondent that used this type of
infrastructure. This respondent indicated that in-company training facilities were combined with
e-learning. While the respondent from the Romanian BUS project QualiShell indicated that such
practice was not innovative, it may nonetheless be considered as a good practice example
because it enabled trainees to effectively develop their skills in accordance with training targets.
Furthermore, this type of training infrastructure was not used by many projects and may be
innovative in other contexts. The box below (box 2) illustrates this case in more detail.
Box 2: Good practice example in using in-company/ practical training
The Romanian BUS project QualiShell developed
training schemes that use in-company/ practical
training as the main type of training infrastructure.
These schemes consist in courses that are divided
into seven different modules. The total course
duration is calculated to last 720 hours, 480 of
which are spent carrying out practical work in
construction companies. This type of
infrastructure is considered beneficial due to the
following reasons:
• Enables hands-on practical working
experience
• Allows trainees to become familiar with
actual working procedures on a step-by-step basis
• 2/3 of such training schemes consist of practical training
© QualiShell in-company training (2015). Used with
permission from Project Coordinator.
14 | P a g e
• Trainees learn to meet on-the-job occupational health and safety regulations
• Trainees learn to handle and maintain work equipment
• Trainees learn to organise assembly work
• Construction companies are involved in training workers
• This type of infrastructure is based on a partnership for education approach: companies cooperate
in order to provide the means of training
• There are no additional costs to developing training facilities
Source: Horia Petran, National Qualification Scheme for Construction Workers to Ensure High Performance Building
Envelopes, Project slides, July 2015; BUILD UP Skills QualiShell, CURRICULUM “Installer of thermal insulation
fenestration systems” Executive summary, March 204; BUILD UP Skills QualiShell Schema naţională de calificare
pentru forţa de muncă din construcţii pentru realizarea de anvelope de înaltă performanţă ale clădirilor, RAPORT
FINAL, August 2015.
3.4. Assessment & suggestions
All analysed types training infrastructures were said to be either easy or very easy to replicate (52% and
48% of all projects respectively). Workshops were said to be easy to replicate and/ or adapt by 70% of
respondents who used this type of training infrastructure, while seminar rooms were said to be very easy
to replicate and/ or adapt by 64% of respondents. In-company training was said to be very easy to replicate
by 67% of respondents. Such data demonstrates that, although all types of infrastructures are easy to
replicate and/ or adapt, seminar rooms are easier to replicate than workshops. The data sample for in-
company training is insufficient to regard it as conclusive. A slightly bigger share of respondents provided
feedback regarding seminar rooms than workshops. Only one project that used in-company training
provided feedback. The table below presents the main strengths and weaknesses for each type of training
infrastructure (see table 1).
Table 1: Gains and pains for each type of training infrastructure
Type Gains Pains
Workshops
• Enables hands-on practical training
• Enables trying out various new construction materials and technologies
• Provides with experience based on actual projects/ simulations
• Provides a safe space to address occupational health and safety issues, e.g. risks and prevention
• Enables trainees to learn basic procedures in case of failure
• Enables trainees to learn all the maintenance routines
• Enables interactive training
• Allows for a detailed, in-depth knowledge transfer
• High costs in setting up this type of infrastructure
• More practical exercises are necessary to benefit from this type of infrastructure
• Training duration is often shorter than expected
• All elements must be suitable and properly installed
• Requires trainers with significant practical experience in order to demonstrate full properties of materials and technologies
Seminar rooms
• Easily accessible
• Easily transferable
• Easy to use
• Flexible
• Suitable for large numbers of trainees
• Suitable for both experienced and less experienced workers
• Suitable for delivering large content
• Enables group discussions on relevant topics
• Allows to develop communication skills
• Good for interdisciplinary cross-craft training
• Good for exchange of best practices
• Enables passive rather than active training
• Lacks personal/ practical input from trainees
• Does not enable sufficient practical training
• Allows to provide only with theoretical principles/ an overview of knowledge
• Not suitable for highly experienced trainees
15 | P a g e
Type Gains Pains
• Enables to provide overviews of diverse techniques
• Enables a systematic approach to relevant topics
• Demands good coordination for organising classes
• Highly depends on quality of trainer and his/ her facilitation skills
In-company training
• Is the most effective form of practical training provided trainee is given sufficient attention of the trainer
• Suitable for in-depth transfer of knowledge;
• Construction companies are directly involved in training workers
• Trainees learn to maintain equipment, organise the working space and meet occupational health and safety regulations. They learn about organisational culture.
• Training duration is often too short
• Training is often too specific/ does not cover all foreseen curriculum as companies are usually specialised in certain type of products, equipment/ technologies, ways of working
• Trainee is not necessarily provided with most up-to-date information on the subject (depends on innovativeness of companies)
• Often requires additional training laboratories which often come in the form of workshops (to develop missing practical skills)
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects; Presentations from
multiple BUS projects as presented in EU Exchange Meetings and own elaborations.
3.5. Recommendations
In conclusion to what has been said in this report, several key aspects are significant and may be taken
into consideration when choosing training infrastructures:
• Training facilities are very important given the fact that they condition all training activities.
However, they require significant investment and therefore it is worthwhile to choose
infrastructures based on clearly defined training needs.
• Ideally, any training infrastructure should be developed according to a high level of design and
maximise the use of available space.
• Seminar rooms are suitable for enabling discussions, communication between different crafts and
sharing of best practices.
• Seminar rooms are more suitable than other types of infrastructures for covering a wide range of
thematic courses.
• Seminar rooms are not an expensive type of infrastructure, however they are only suitable for
more passive forms of training.
• As such, seminar rooms are ideally suited for the training of trainers due to reasons stated above;
• Workshops and seminar rooms are equally suitable for meeting a broad range of training
objectives, yet workshops are more suitable than seminars for developing specific/ technical
knowledge and/ or skills.
• Workshops are more expensive than other types of infrastructures.
• Workshops are best suited for the training of workers/ technicians.
• Workshops which contain demo models for training are a highly effective means of training.
• In-company training may only train rather small numbers of people and require additional training
laboratories which often come in the form of workshops. As a result, training in workshops might
seem as a more economical means of reaching the desired training objectives.
16 | P a g e
4. Training materials
4.1. Definition
Training materials refer to documents, tools, gadgets, objects, etc. that are used to deliver training. The
better the training materials are, the more effective is the training. This part of the report focuses on the
three types of materials that were used in the BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction
skills projects:
• Didactic materials6 refer to materials used in specific training activities including Power Point
Presentations or similar materials such as audio-visual materials, flip charts, drawings,
demonstrative objects, etc.
• Training and reference manuals7 refer to books describing training content and/or training
methods. The training manuals are usually used by trainers to prepare/facilitate training, while
reference manuals are usually given to participants after they have attended the training.
• Software8 refers to training tools such as computer simulation programmes, mobile applications,
e-timetables or other similar instruments.
4.2. Major characteristics
The major characteristics of the training courses did not vary significantly between the different materials
used. However, some slight variations may be considered as relevant.
Didactic materials were the most widely used training material (in 56% of all projects) and therefore
covered more countries than any other training material. Didactic materials were available in 25
countries. There were no clear defining features between the countries where such training materials
were available. Training and reference manuals were available in 12 countries and, likewise, there were
no clear defining features between the countries where such training materials were available. This
demonstrates that both didactic materials and reference and training manuals are suitable for any
country, irrespective of its characteristics. Software tools were available in three countries, namely the
Netherlands, Sweden and Spain. However, this sample is too small to assert any significant conclusions.
The main objective for all types of training materials was said to be the development of specific/
technical knowledge and/ or skills, as 44% of all respondents selected this option. Yet for reference and
training manuals the share of respondents who chose this option was higher than average, while those
who used didactic materials and software tools also selected the development of soft/ basic skills and
attitudinal/behaviour change (see graph 5 below). Such data suggests that reference and training manuals
are the training materials of choice for specific practical training, while didactic materials and software
tools are more convenient for broader purpose training.
6 This type of training materials were considered the main one in the following projects: H2020 PROF TRAC, QualiShell, BRICKS, CrossCraft, WE-Qualify, Qualitrain, Energotrain, Enerpro, N@W, MEnS, CROSKILLS II, Train-to-NZEB, BEET, BEEP, LuxBuild. 7 This type of training materials were considered the main one in the following projects: UPSWING, FORESEE, TRAINBUD, QualiBuild, BUILDEST II, STAVEDU, ingREeS. 8 This type of training materials were considered the main one in the following projects: Construye 2020, SWEBUILD, BUStoB.
17 | P a g e
Graph 5: Objectives for using different types of training materials
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects.
A successful example of reference and training manuals is presented in box 3 while a successful example
of didactic materials is presented in box 4.
Box 3: Good practice example in using training manuals
The Portuguese BUS project FORESEE produced eight training
manuals which are now available for future training. These manuals
cover the following topics: Biomass boilers, HVAC, lighting, PV
systems, solar thermal systems, thermal insulation instalation,
micro wind systems, and window instalation. They first explain the
general concepts and the overall framework within which the
different construction elements operate. Then the manuals
proceed to detailed step-by-step instructions on how to install the
different elements and how to work with all the necessary building
materials. In addition, the manuals also contain formulas for
specific calculations which are necessary for element construction.
The most beneficial aspects of such training manuals are the
following:
• They are user-friendly.
• They contain extensive information which is easily
applicable to practical tasks and actual work situations.
• Users were were satisfied with the balance between theoretical learning and the practical
application of the material contents.
• They provide clear guidelines and structure to training activities.
• They are easy to use for pedagogic purposes due to point stated above.
Source: Helder Goncalves, Training for Renewables and Energy Efficiency in Building Sector, 21st January, 2016; Helder
Goncalves, Training for Renewables and Energy Efficiency in Building Sector, Training material, 30th May, 2017.
17%
41%
7%
24%
10%8%
54%
15%
23%
0%
33% 33%
0%
33%
0%0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Development of soft/basic knowledge and/
or skills
Development ofspecific/ technicalknowledge and/ or
skills
Development ofmanagement/
supervisory knowledgeand/ or skills
Attitudinal/ behaviourchange
Other
Didactic Materials
Reference and training manuals
Software tools
© FORESEE Training Manual front
page (2016). Used with permission
from Project Coordinator.
18 | P a g e
Box 4: Good practice example in using didactic materials
The BUS project from Luxembourg, LuxBuild 2020, used
didactic materials as its main training tool. The project
set up a demonstrative object, namely a didactic
building for its training activities. This didactic building
is a demo model of an actual building site which
contains both real size and small scale models for
various construction tasks as well as construction
material samples. Training is based on introducing
know-how through practical hands-on exercises. The
main activities are the following: (1) Structural work;
(2) Wood construction; (3) Exterior carpentry; (4)
Special techniques; (5) Electricians; (6) Façade
specialists.
The practice is considered beneficial due to the following reasons:
• It is adapted to the needs of different crafts.
• Training integrates the impact of passive
house construction for different workers, such
as bricklayers, carpenters, façade specialists,
etc.
• Provides trainees with practical training.
• Provides trainees with a diversity of learning
situations.
• Simulates actual on-site working conditions.
• Enables live demonstrations of various tasks.
• Allows for immediate interaction between
trainers and trainees. Sources: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects; Alexis Sikora, LuxBuild2020, National Initiative Qualification for Workers in the Building Sector.
The level of progress of activities for these types of training materials are illustrated by graph 6 below.
The specific survey on main training materials was carried out in November 2016 – April 2016. This report
presents the given situation of relevant projects at the time. Graphs below indicate the extent to which
training materials were realised in projects and thus, the extent to which insights in this report are based
on experiences in the field. The majority of courses which use didactic materials (67%) have been
completed, while most courses which use reference and training manuals (56%) or software tools (67%)
are still ongoing.
© Copyright belongs to Institut de Formation
Sectoriel du Bâtiment. LuxBuild2020 didactic
building. Used with permission from Project
Coordinator.
© Copyright belongs to Institut de Formation
Sectoriel du Bâtiment. LuxBuild2020 didactic
building interior workshop. Used with permission
from Project Coordinator.
19 | P a g e
Graph 6: Level of progress of activities for different types of training materials
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects.
Considering that the progress of activities which use didactic materials is the highest, it is not a surprise
that the number of people trained so far using didactic materials greatly exceeds the number of people
trained by using training and reference manuals or software tools (see graph 7 below). However, the
approximate number of people planned to be trained during the remaining time of the project is much
larger for software tools than other materials:
• Didactic materials – 7150
• Reference and training manuals – 2130
• Software – 3000 + n, where n where n is an indeterminate value (respondent indicated
‘thousands’).
This demonstrates that software tools have a much higher potential than other main types of training
materials in reaching large numbers of workers during training activities. However, software tools are not
necessarily appropriate for all workers (e.g. some may not have relevant devices and/ or affinity for e-
learning).
Graph 7: Number of people (to be) trained for different types of training materials*
67%
27%
7%
0% 0%
33%
56%
0% 0%
11%
33%
67%
0% 0% 0%0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
All activities have beencompleted
Part activities havebeen completed
Activities have beenplanned, but not yet
started
Activities have not yetbeen planned
Other
Didactic materials
Reference and training manuals
Software tools
889450
2130
1150900500
10000
30003116
882
7150
2400
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
Number of people,approximately, have been
trained so far
Highest number in project Number of people,approximately, planed to betrained during the remaining
time of project
Highest number in project
manuals
software
didactic materials
20 | P a g e
* For number of people planned to be trained during the remaining time of the project with software tools: 3000 + n,
where n is an indeterminate value. Here n = 7000 for illustration purposes (respondent indicated ’thousands’).
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects.
The target group for the majority of training materials (with a few single exceptions) was defined by the
following characteristics:
• Most trainees were workers/technicians (63% of all training materials)
• All or majority workers were aged 30-54
• All or majority were employed
• All or majority were nationals
• All or majority were experienced employees (working in the area for at least few years).
The training course for the majority of training materials (with a few single exceptions) was defined by
the following characteristics:
• Most training courses were oriented towards building construction.
• The duration of courses was shorter term.
• Training took place during work hours.
The proportions regarding the other thematic course categories varied between the different materials
(see graph 8 below). Reference and training manuals were focused less on renewables and more on energy
systems, while software tools were equally focused on all three categories. This could be due to the fact
that software tools are easily applicable to all categories, while didactic materials and reference manuals
must be developed according to particular priorities. For example, reference and training manuals could
be more applicable to practical training in building construction and not as applicable to conceptual
introduction to renewables. However, such variation in data could also be due to a significantly smaller
number of projects that used reference and training manuals or software tools compared to number of
projects that used didactic materials.
Graph 8: Thematic course categories for different training materials
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects.
Major characteristics of the courses and training did not differ significantly. From this data it may be
inferred that there are no training characteristics that would be specific to some particular type of training
47%
38%
33%
25%
44%
33%
28%
19%
33%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%Buildings
Energy systems
Renewables
21 | P a g e
materials and that all analysed training materials are equally suitable for training activities within relevant
projects.
4.3. Innovativeness
A major share of respondents (68%) considered the training materials used at BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) to
be innovative. Training materials were said to be innovative either due to their presentation format,
their content or both. Details for each type were as follows:
• Didactic materials were said to be innovative in 67% of projects that used this training material.
The main reasons why they were said to be innovative are both their presentation format and
their content - didactic materials were easily accessible and available online, while their content
included themes related to NZEB issues and other topics not yet covered by vocational education
and training in countries.
• Training and reference manuals were said to be innovative by 60% of respondents. Training
manuals were identified as innovative in 50% of all projects that used them, while reference
manuals were said to be innovative in 75% of all projects that used them. The main reason for
their innovativeness was said to be new content (i.e. not yet covered by literature elsewhere)
and full scale models which present detailed step-by-step instructions on how to, for example,
install various elements of a building.
• Software tools were said to be innovative by all respondents (100%) who used this training
material. This training material was identified as innovative due to its presentation format,
namely online availability to users. The project Construye2020 is a good example of such
innovative training material and is more extensively presented in the box below (see box 5). Box 5: Good practice example in using software tools
0The Spanish BUS project Construye2020 has developed
a learning app as part of its training activities. It was
developed according to three baseline factors:
• Training needs. Such needs were identified
during the Build Up Skills projects.
• Pedagogical needs. The app aims to facilitate
training in a user-friendly manner.
• Innovation. The app is available for download
for Android and IOS on any mobile device free
of charge.
The app contains five sections: (1) Energy efficiency, (2)
Insulation, (3) Exterior windows and doors, (4) Efficient
installations, (5) Renewable energy. Each section is then divided into smaller segments, which present
detailed information on the concepts behind energy efficient construction and include step-by-step
instructions for installation of different elements within each section. These sections also include drag-
and-drop exercises as well as technical interactive explanations.
The app is available in two languages, namely English and Spanish. The contents are easily transferable,
as they are based on EU legislation and contain an overview of basic concepts.
The benefits of this training material include its innovative and detailed content, easy applicability to
practical training and wide accessibility.
Sources: Javier Gonzalez Lopez, Build Up 2020, Innovative training tools for the construction workforce, Athens, 6th
December, 2016; Construye 2020, Fundacion laboral de la construction, GooglePlay, available at:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.esampedro.simuladorApp&hl=en.
© Construye2020 Mobile App. Used with
permission from Project Coordinator.
22 | P a g e
4.4. Assessment & suggestions
All analysed types of training materials were said to be either easy or very easy to replicate, with 61% and
36% of the total number of survey respondents choosing the respective options. There were no notable
differences between the different training materials. This may be considered as a positive aspect because
when developing training materials, their replicability does not need to be an issue for concern.
While didactic materials were the most widely used training material (in 56% of all projects) and,
consecutively, the majority of feedback available from survey respondents was in reference to didactic
materials (60% of all survey respondents), training and reference manuals received more positive
feedback. In addition to positive aspects, training and reference manuals also avoid many drawbacks
which were mentioned in reference to other training materials, such as complexity, lack of practically
applicable information or material development and maintanence costs. The table below presents the
main strengths and weaknesses for each type of training material (see table 2 below).
23 | P a g e
Table 2: Gains and pains for each type of training material
Type Gains Pains
Didactic materials
• Easy to use and understand
• Present detailed information
• Up-to-date
• Include good practice examples and common mistakes
• Lack illustrations
• Often too complex
• Lack more practically applicable information
• Contain only an overview of information
• Limited interaction possibilities
Training and reference manuals
• Contain information that is easily applicable to practical tasks
• Contain numerous useful graphs and figures;
• Contain detailed instructions for carrying out specific calculations
• Present examples from real projects
• Are useful to refer to after the course ends
• Need to be specifically adapted to the target group
• Require a high level of writer skills;
• Need to include more examples and more standard solutions to various issues/ mistakes
• Passive material, suitable for self-learning
Software tools
• May be accessed and used in any location, including the building site
• Easy to understand
• Free of charge
• Interactive
• May be updated according to recent developments
• Costly tools that are difficult to update without EU funding
• Take a lot of time to update;
• Infographics must be well thought through and adequately developed
• May not be suitable for workers not using ICT devices/ less prone to e-learning
• Require an internet connection
• Lack more detailed and more practical information
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects; Presentations from
multiple BUS projects as presented in EU Exchange Meetings and own elaborations.
4.5. Recommendations
To sum up, several key aspects are significant and may be taken into consideration when developing
training materials:
• Ideally training materials should be detailed, easily accessible to users (not only in terms of physical
location, but also in terms of other aspects, including language, technologies (e.g. availability of
devices to use software), etc.) and easily comprehensible.
• Didactic materials seem more preferable type of training materials for broader training objectives
such as attitudinal/behaviour changes or development of soft skills, while reference and training
manuals seem to be more suitable for developing specific/technical knowledge and/or skills.
• Software tools are equally suitable for all training objectives.
• Developing software tools may be expensive, but such tools have more potential in reaching wider
audiences and may be more easily accessible (provided this material addresses well the specific
training needs of a selected target group).
• Best training materials contain step-by-step instructions and include good practice examples from
actual projects. This may be applied to all training materials.
• Using local examples which are adopted to local conditions is an important element for all types of
training materials.
• While reference and training manuals are not as innovative, they are highly applicable to practical
tasks due to their detailed content.
• Combining innovative formats, such as didactic materials (e.g. demonstrative objects, drawings or
power point presentations) or software with innovative content presented in manual form (e.g.
step-by-step instructions with detailed illustrations) could result in easily accessible and highly
applicable training material, suitable for all training objectives.
24 | P a g e
• Providing training materials in different languages is beneficial as this allows more users to access
training content.
• More training materials could be moved to online platforms, as this would make the content more
accessible and would also enable self-learning.
• Introducing innovations in training materials (e.g. using software) require a change of attitude as
well as usual habits on behalf of trainers. Unfortunately, trainers are often reluctant to do that and
therefore, it is advisable that any initiative which introduces innovative elements should assign a
significant share of resources not only towards the development of new technologies but also to
the instruction of those who will use them (i.e. trainers).
25 | P a g e
5. Training methods
5.1. Definition
Training methods refer to the ways of how training is delivered to participants and includes classroom-
based training, practical training, computer-based training, etc. Suitable training methods allow for
appropriate communication of the training content and thus make training more effective. This report
focuses on the following three types of training methods (around 80% of all BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and
Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects focus on these types of training methods):
• Classroom-based interactive training led/ facilitated by trainer/ instructor9 is group or peer-
assisted learning, where a group of learners work on the same topic/ problem/ task/ etc. (e.g.
suitable for training demanding change in behaviour of a learner, for example, when training
for cross-craft understanding).
• Work-based hands-on or direct practical training10 refers to systematic training alternating
between periods of training at the workplace and training in a vocational education and training
institution or training centre. It is not legally defined and the learner is usually not an employee
who receives remuneration. This type of training foresees limited responsibility of an employer
for the company-based part of the programme and it may lead to formal or non-formal
qualification usually at EQF 3-4 levels.
• Mixed classroom and ICT training 11 is a more general method of training that may incorporate
blended learning and/ or flipped classroom training. Blended learning is a formal education
program in which a trainee learns at least in part through delivery of content and instruction via
digital and online media with some element of trainee control over time, place, path, or pace.
Flipped classroom training is a type of blended learning, where the trainee prepares for the next
day’s lessons and activities before entering the classroom, so that face-to-face class time is
spent more interactively.
There are also other types of training methods including classroom-based passive training (i.e. lecture or
seminar based instruction), hands-off or indirect guidance-based training (i.e. coaching and mentoring),
ICT-based training techniques (i.e. self-study built on computer- and internet-based training programmes)
and hands-on or direct practical training techniques (i.e. apprenticeship, traineeship, internship, job-
rotation and job-shadowing)12. However, these are not covered in this report as they have only been used
in a small number of cases (around 20% of all projects) or have not been used in relevant projects at all
(e.g. computer-based training programmes or internships). Thus further sections of the report centre on
the three training methods outlined above.
5.2. Major characteristics
The major characteristics of the training courses did not vary significantly between the training methods
used. However, some slight variations may be considered as relevant.
Classroom-based interactive training was the most widely used training method (48% of all projects) and
covered a total of 16 countries. Work-based training was used in 19% of all projects and covered five
countries. Meanwhile mixed classroom and ICT training was used in only 11% of all projects, but this
9 This type of training methods were considered the main one in the following projects: I-TOWN, FORCE, CROSSCRAFT, SWEBUILD, UPSWING, FORESEE, QualiTrain, TRAINBUD, N@W, QualiBuild, Train-to-NZEB, BUILDEST II, BEEP. 10 This type of training methods were considered the main one in the following projects: WEQualify, Construye 2020, STAVEDU, BEET, LuxBuild. 11 This type of training methods were considered the main one in the following projects: PROF-TRAC, MEnS, ingREeS. 12 For definition of all types of training methods see the database on training activities, sheet of general survey questionnaire.
26 | P a g e
method covered the most extensive geographical area, namely a total of 20 countries. There were no
clear defining features between the countries where such training methods were available. Such data
indicates that while classroom-based interactive training and work-based training both cover the amount
of countries in proportion to their application, mixed classroom and ICT training covers a much larger
number of countries. Therefore, mixed classroom and ICT training is a good method for reaching widely
dispersed target audiences.
The main objective for all types of training methods was said to be the development of specific/ technical
knowledge and/ or skills (44% of all respondents selected this option). However, work-based learning
focused on the development of specific/ technical knowledge and/ or skills well above the average (63%
of all projects which used this training method) in comparison to other methods and barely focused on
any other objectives (see graph 9 below). Both classroom-based interactive training and mixed classroom
and ICT training were more focused towards attitudinal/ behaviour changes. Classroom-based interactive
training focused more or less equally on the development of specific/ technical knowledge and/ or skills
(38% of all projects which used this type of training method) and attitudinal/ behaviour change (42% of
all projects which used this type of training method). Mixed classroom and ICT training was mostly
oriented towards attitudinal/ behaviour change (67% of all projects which used this type of method). This
data suggests that some training methods are preferable to others according to the training objectives:
for development of specific/ technical knowledge and/ or skills, work-based training is the method of
choice, while mixed classroom and ICT training is better suited for bringing about attitudinal/ behaviour
change. Classroom-based interactive training is suitable for a wider range of objectives, but for not for
any particular objective. A relatively successful case example that illustrates how work-based training
may successfully be used in training for specific/ technical knowledge and/ or skills is the WEQualify
project from Cyprus. This example is presented in box 6.
Graph 9: Objectives for using different types of training methods
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects.
8%
38%
8%
42%
4%
13%
63%
0%
8%
0%0%
33%
0%
67%
0%0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Development of soft/basic knowledge and/
or skills
Development ofspecific/ technical
knowledge and/ or skills
Development ofmanagement/
supervisory knowledgeand/ or skills
Attitudinal/ behaviourchange
Other
Classroom-basedinteractive training
Work-based training
Mixed classroom andICT training
27 | P a g e
Box 6: Good practice examples in work-based training
The BUS project BEEP has developed
a specific concept for work-based
training that resulted in a successful
work-based training programme. Its
main elements were the following:
1. Developing a training scheme
incl. consultations with trainers,
trade union and construction
companies.
2. Testing the scheme at training
sessions.
3. Finalising the scheme based on
the feedback and experiences from pilot trainings and in-practice use by a construction company
(the project closely collaborated with construction companies in developing and carrying out
trainings).
4. Development of training methods on learners’ terms incl. preparation of descriptive material in
five languages (FI, SE, EE, RU and EN).
5. Focus on short term training (as this is preferred by users) and attitude change (i.e. change
agents in companies training their peers). It also utilised IT empowered self-learning
opportunities with the help of e-learning incl. various videos, instruction cards.
6. Trainings involved extended target groups of pre-fabricated house manufacturing industry incl.
housebuilders, supervisors, installers and salespeople.
7. Training was promoted by an on-site training ambassador – a face of the BUILD UP Skills training
scheme who was easily approachable both by the workers and the management team, spoke
their language and knew the product. He visited construction sites, was involved in training or
trainers and workers, gave presentations during meetings/ fares/ seminars and contributed to
several articles.
Another BUS project We Qualify in Cyprus was innovative
as it used workshops for training workers on energy
efficiency and RES in buildings for the first time in the
country’s history. The project set up a workshop that
aimed to replicate actual working conditions as
accurately as possible and invited highly experienced
external trainers to train the trainees. Training consisted
in working with a small group of trainees who were
taught: (1) installation of thermal insulation, (2)
installation of thermopanes and exterior sunshades and
(3) installation and maintenance of biomass boilers and
stoves. Training material was provided in the workshop
and on an online platform. The project trained a total of
92 workers/ technicians and received a training certificate. The majority of trainees were satisfied
with the training courses and said that such training helped to considerably improve their knowledge
and skills. However, some indicated that work-based learning constituted only 1/3 of training and said
© WeQUalify training activities in the workshop. Used with permission from Project Coordinator.
28 | P a g e
that more practice was preferable. The main strengths of this particular project were due to the
following:
• Training was highly individualised.
• Training was very detailed and technical.
• Training was practical and easily applicable to trainees’ work in construction.
• Training materials were available online for self-learning.
• Trainers were highly experienced and therefore provided trainees with valuable know-how.
• Training certification was considered a valuable asset for gaining a competitive advantage in
the construction market.
Source: Irmeli Mikkonen, presentation of BEEP project, 7th December 2016; Andreas Polydorou: Innovations and
incentives to simulate the demand for training; BUILD UP Skills 7th EU exchange meeting, 18th – 19th January, 2016;
WE-Qualify, Training, specialization, certification, Acquiring knowledge and skills for the energy performance
improvement of buildings in Cyprus, Final Report, December 2016.
The level of progress of activities for the types of training methods are illustrated by graph 10 below.
The specific survey on main training methods was carried out in November 2016 – April 2016. This report
presents the given situation of relevant projects at the time. Graphs below indicate the extent to which
training methods were realised in projects and thus, the extent to which insights in this report are based
on experiences in the field. Slightly more than half (52%) of all project activities using the relevant training
methods have been completed. The majority of courses which use work-based training (80%) have been
completed, while most courses which use mixed classroom and ICT training (67%) are still ongoing. Only
slightly more than half (54%) of the courses which use classroom-based interactive training have been
completed, with the remaining share of courses still ongoing or not yet started.
Graph 10: Level of progress of activities for different types of training methods
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects.
Considering that the progress of activities which use work-based training is the highest, it is not surprising
that the number of people trained so far using work-based training exceeds the number of people trained
using other methods (see graph 11 below). However, although a smaller share of activities that use other
methods have been completed, the number of people trained by using classroom-based interactive
training and mixed classroom and ICT training is close to the number of people trained via work-based
training. Furthermore, the approximate number of people planned to be trained during the remaining
54%
38%
8%
0% 0%
80%
20%
0% 0% 0%0%
67%
0% 0%
33%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
All activities have beencompleted
Part activities havebeen completed
Activities have beenplanned, but not yet
started
Activities have not yetbeen planned
Other
Classroom-basedinteractive training
Work-based training
Mixed classroom andICT training
29 | P a g e
time of the project is much larger for classroom-based interactive training and for mixed classroom and
ICT training, even when compared to the number of people already trained by using work-based learning.
While classroom-based interactive training was the most widely used training method and this could
account for large numbers of people trained, the opposite is the case for mixed classroom and ICT training.
This type of training method was the least popular, but it is foreseen to train the largest number of people.
This clearly demonstrates that this method is the most suitable for reaching a large target audience. This
can be further illustrated with an example of the BUStoB project (see Box 7). It was the only project that
used ICT-based training as its main type of training method. The project is foreseen to train the highest
number of workers per single project (3000) and focuses on workers aged under 29.
Graph 11: Number of people (to be) trained for different types of training methods
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects.
Box 7: Good practice example in using ICT-based training
The Dutch BUS project BUStoB is foreseen to use only ICT-based
training techniques as its main training method. Courses target
diverse professions that include craftsmen such as bricklayers, or
carpenters, mechanics, engineers and other service providers.
Courses are provided via a mobile application. The application offers
tracks for construction, installation and construction finishing work.
These tracks are then further divided by occupations, which are then
subdivided into courses on various topics, e.g. airtightness
construction, façade insulation etc. Courses are interactive and
contain exercises with evaluation. Trainees can also complete
MemoTrainings and extra practices. The benefits of this type of
training are the following:
• Enables distant and self-learning
• Makes training available for large numbers of people
• Interactive exercises enable active learning
• Exercise evaluation provides immediate feedback
• MemoTraining sessions allow trainees to re-asses their
knowledge
• Extra practices are a handy tool for trainees which feel standard exercises to be insufficient;
2067
500
3865
24002181
1500
350100
1624
882
4060
1860
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
Number of people,approximately, have been
trained so far
Highest number in project Number of people,approximately, planed to betrained during the remaining
time of project
Highest number in project
Classroom-basedinteractive training
Work-based training
Mixed classroom and ICTtraining
© BUStoB Mobile App. Used with permission from Project Coordinator.
30 | P a g e
• The application may be used in various locations, including on-site
• The application is user-friendly
• The application contains a lot of detailed information that may be updated given the need
Source: www.buildupskillsnl.anewspring.com, BUILDUPSkillsNL: Professions and specialisms – courses and training:
2015 – 2016.
The target group for the majority of all training methods (with a few single exceptions) was defined by
the following characteristics:
• Most trainees were workers/ technicians (67% of all training methods)
• All or majority workers were aged 30-54
• All or majority were employed
• All or majority were nationals
• All or majority were experienced employees (working in the area for at least few years)
However, there were two single exceptions to the target group which are worth emphasising:
1) All respondents who selected mixed classroom and ICT training as the main type of training method
used in their project indicated that the type of trainees trained included architects, engineers,
building managers and middle and senior level construction professionals. Although the sample is
relatively small, it may be inferred that mixed classroom and ICT training is more appropriate for
white-collar/ highly skilled workers.
2) A total of nine projects13 trained trainers. Seven on these projects used classroom-based interactive
training as their main method of training. This constitutes more than half (54%) of all projects which
used this type of training method. This suggests that classroom-based interactive training is the most
suitable method for the training of trainers. Two projects, namely BEEP and PROF-TRAC may be
considered exemplary on developing a systematic train-the-trainer methodology. Their cases are
illustrated by the box below (box 8).
Box 8: Good practice examples in developing train-the-trainer methodology
The Finish BUS project BEEP was
strongly orientated towards
developing the train-the-trainer
methodology. While it applied
classroom-based interactive
training as its main training
method, it also focused extensively
on on-site practical training.
However, training the trainers was
mostly classroom-based.
The project carried out a survey
amongst trainers in order to map out their specific needs for training and to develop a course
programme for teachers/trainers. Trainers mostly said that new training materials on energy-efficient
construction were needed for successful training. Therefore, the project proceeded with collecting and
documenting best practices in energy-efficient construction to compile a set of training materials in
PowerPoint slides, a Guide/Instruction cards and educational videos. All materials were published in
13 I-TOWN, FORESEE, Train-to-NZEB, BEEP, QualiTrain, SWEBUILD and N@W, BEET, PROF-TRAC.
© BEEP Training of Trainers in a seminar room (2016). Used with
permission from Project Coordinator.
31 | P a g e
five languages and were made available online. Approximately 40 trainers attended two-day pilot
training courses where they tested this training material and became familiar with its contents.
Furthermore, trainers exchanged their ideas on pedagogical aspects such as utilisation of e-learning in
construction. In addition, this project also trained on-site ambassadors for training in sustainable
construction, but these activities did not take place is classrooms. The most beneficial aspects of this
practice were the following:
• Trainers themselves identified the main issues in energy-efficient training which needed
improvement.
• Trainers participated in the development of training materials.
• Trainers could test out the training materials and suggest improvements based on their needs.
• Trainers were adequately familiarised with the training materials and could develop training
methodologies on their basis.
• Trainers could exchange best practice examples in training methodologies.
The BUS project PROF-TRAC, coordinated by the Netherlands, also had a strong focus on developing
the train-the-trainer methodology. However, its target group type consisted in engineers, architects
and managers from 14 EU countries. The training method of choice was mixed-classroom and ICT
training. The courses focus on integrated construction design and multidisciplinary team work. Such
courses last three days and consist of lectures, workshops and technical tours at various locations.
During the lectures trainers address educational materials, modern teaching methods and various
aspects of sustainable construction. During the workshop teams develop training courses which are
tailored to specific needs of their country. All training materials are made available online through the
PROF-TRAC Open Training Platform14. This may be considered as a good practice example due to similar
reasons as the BEEP project. However, it also included additional aspects such as:
• The trainers were trained to become ‘ambassadors’ who could then initiate and organise
national training programs to train trainers on a national scale, creating a snowball effect in
the long-run.
• The project encouraged interdisciplinary exchange between construction professionals.
• The training of trainers included a rigorous Skills Mapping methodology that created
inventories of existing qualifications, education programmes, post-initial trainings, etc.
• The project was foreseen to train very large numbers of people.
Source: Irmeli Mikkonen, BUILD UP Skills BEEP, Finland, TWG 3 Innovative Training BUILD UP Skills – 9 EU Exchange
Meeting; BUILD UP Skills Finland, 2013-2016, Quality and Competence, Report, 2016; Peter Op ‘T Veld, PROF/TRAC,
PROFessional multi-disciplinary Training and Continuing development in skills for NZEB principles;
http://proftrac.eu/open-training-platform-for-nzeb-professionals.html;
The training courses for the majority of training methods (with a few single exceptions) were defined by
the following characteristics:
• Most training courses were oriented towards building construction (42% of all courses).
• Most of the courses were shorter term training (e.g. few hours, few days or weeks).
• Training took place during work hours.
The proportions regarding the other thematic course categories varied between the different training
methods (see graph 12 below). Classroom-based interactive training was almost equally applied to courses
on buildings (43%) and on energy systems (36%). All thematic course categories were equally covered (33%
14 The PROF-TRAC platform may be accessed via the following link: http://proftrac.eu/trainers-area/dashboard.html
32 | P a g e
for each category) by projects which used mixed classroom and ICT training as their main training method.
This demonstrates that mixed classroom and ICT training is a good method to cover a wider range of
themes, while both classroom-based training and work-based training is suitable for covering less.
Graph 12: Thematic course categories for different training methods
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects.
Major characteristics of the courses and training did not differ significantly. From this data it may be
inferred that there are no training characteristics that would be specific to some particular type of training
method and that all analysed training methods are equally suitable for training activities within relevant
projects.
5.3. Innovativeness
A major share of respondents (78%) considered the training methods used at BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) to
be innovative. Training methods were said to be innovative mostly because they offered training via new
technologies (e.g. e-learning) or because they offered training that innovatively combined traditional
theoretical (e.g. classroom-based training) and practical training methods. Details for each type were as
follows:
• Classroom-based interactive training was said to be innovative in 77% of projects as it combined
theoretical learning with interactive sessions which included practical exercises and, in some
cases, multidisciplinary cross-craft training or peer-to-peer assisted learning. Some projects also
adopted the train-the-trainer approach.
• Work-based training was said to be innovative in 80% of projects that used this type of training
method due to effective combination between theoretical instruction and hands-on training,
using a specially constructed house unit or combining interactive on-site training with e-learning.
• Mixed classroom and ICT training was said to be innovative in all projects (100%) that used this
type of training method due to training via new technologies such as virtual interactive platforms.
This type of training method enabled distant learning and, at the same time, encouraged
interactive discussions between different professionals in the construction sector. The latter
element also contributed to multidisciplinary exchange within groups of learners. Example of
classroom and ICT training is discussed in Box 9.
43%42%
33%36%
25%
33%
21%
33% 33%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Buildings
Energy systems
Renewables
33 | P a g e
Box 3: Good practice example in using mixed classroom and ICT training
The BUS project Meeting of Energy
Professional Skills (MEnS) which was launched
in Italy in 2015, used mixed classroom and ICT
training as its main training method. Training
was targeted at trainees on European Quality
Framework Level 7 and aimed to enhance
nZEB skills of building managers, architects
and engineers. Project activities were
available in multiple countries across Europe,
namely Italy, Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark,
Germany, Greece, Ireland, Romania, Spain, United Kingdom and FYROM.
Training was carried out via classroom-based training and through the MEnS e-learning platform15. This
platform is a virtual innovation park that contains online courses, various case studies (Front Meeting
of Skills, see below) and webinars. The platform operates as an interactive space and provides with
the following list of benefits:
• It enables distant learning and self-learning.
• It promotes interactive exchange between professionals in sustainable construction regarding
technological innovations and novel possibilities in using advanced techniques.
• It provides a virtual meeting point between professional experts, market players and building
industries on nZEB issues in the civil sector.
• The Front Meeting of Skills (FMS) also known as the Case Study Experience is a unique
educational activity that brings an integrated methodology and presents detailed case studies
in nZEB construction. FMS is an educational programme of two parts. The first part takes two
days and consists of seminars and lectures which cover a particular theme in sustainable
construction. The second part takes one day and consists in guided site tours to showcase
various examples of specific buildings/ districts that illustrate the themes discussed on the
first two days. In addition, participants to the FMS form working groups that engage with
presenters.
• Provides an innovative interdisciplinary approach to training in construction. Some of the
disciplines involved are architects, electrical engineers, mechanical engineers, technicians,
economists, etc.
• Training courses will be available online for at least another five years after the official project
end-date.
• Training course videos are often streamed live on social media (e.g. Facebook) and most
course content is easily accessible either through Facebook or LinkedIn platforms.
• Training courses are accredited with a formal procedure and are assigned ECTS credits.
• Users were mostly satisfied, especially with new business contacts and certified professional
upskilling. To some trainees these aspects were helpful in finding a job.
Source: Dr. Daniela Melandri, Meeting of Energy professional Skills, BUILD UP SKILLS, 7th EU Exchange meeting,
Bruxelles 18th January, 2016; MEnS, Report from the Front Meeting of Skills in Denmark, 31st of January 2017; MEnS
training platform: http://www.mens-nzeb.eu/en/.
15 The platform may be accessed via http://www.mens-nzeb.eu/en/. Most videos and webinars are also available on their Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/MEnSH2020/.
© MEnS classroom training (2017).
34 | P a g e
5.4. Assessment & suggestions
Differences between discussed training methods in their replicability were not significant. All analysed
types of training methods were said to be either easy or very easy to replicate, with 48% of the total
number of survey respondents choosing both options. This may be considered as a positive aspect because
when developing training methods, their replicability does not need to be an issue for concern. The only
aspect which may be relevant is the difficulty of replicating work-based training - 20% of respondents who
used work-based training said that the method was difficult to replicate as it requires a special
construction training unit and is cost-intensive.
The most extensive feedback was available for classroom-based interactive training, as it was the most
widely used method. 62% of projects that used this method of training provided some feedback. While a
bigger share of respondents who used other methods, such work-based training (80%) and mixed classroom
and ICT training (67%) provided feedback, the proportion of feedback was much more limited due to small
numbers of projects that used these types of methods. The pains and gains for each type of training
method are indicative of the differences between methods and the limits of their applicability. The table
below presents the main strengths and weaknesses for each type of training method (see table 3).
Table 3: Gains and pains for each type of training method
Type Gains Pains
Classroom-based
interactive training
• Interactive group work encourages exchange of best practices and furthers improvements
• Suitable for wider range of training objectives incl. cross-craft and interdisciplinary training
• Encourages dialogue and communication between trainees
• Course content may later be used on-site
• Is less focused on technical details and more on systematic aspects of construction
• The theoretical component is suitable for trainees and esp. trainers
• Questions may be answered directly and right away
• Is suitable for meeting personal training needs in a group with different backgrounds and experience
• Encourages self-learning
• Flexible
• Requires experienced trainers
• Limited number of qualified trainers available (see point above)
• Training often does not contain enough technical details
• Workers (esp. low/medium skilled) are often not sufficiently engaged by classroom training and often prefer hands-on practical training (let me show you/ show me approach)
• Groups of trainees with different backgrounds make training more complicated (trainers are often forced to simplify training content so that it is understood by the least experienced participants)
• Lacks trainee evaluation
• May be difficult to access (for those that need to travel longer distances and/ or during work hours)
• Time-consuming
Work-based training
• Provides valuable practical experience;
• Is the best method to obtain technical know-how and skills
• Is adapted to diverse workers’ needs, esp. to the needs of blue-collar workers
• Is adapted to a multilingual workforce;
• Provides with a good balance between theory and practice
• Less formal compared to other types of hands-on training (e.g. apprenticeships) and thus more flexible with regard to raining content, requirements for participating companies, etc.
• Cost-intensive and requires specific training infrastructure (thus often difficult to replicate)
• Training duration must be longer
• Allows only a limited number of trainees per training unit
• Fixed location of training could limit accessibility
• Usually tailored for blue-collar workers
• Participants should be selected so that their work experience and education level matches as much as possible
Mixed classroom and ICT training
• May potentially reach a wide target audience and result in very large numbers of people trained
• Does not include practical training (acquired knowledge needs to be
35 | P a g e
Type Gains Pains
• Good method to cover a wider range of themes and especially suitable for cross-craft and interdisciplinary training that require attitudinal/ behavioural change
• Material is available online, which makes training flexible (wherever and whenever preferred by the learner)
• Suitable for self-learning (see point above)
further applied to make training more effective)
• May not be suitable for workers not using ICT devices/ less prone for e-learning
• Material must be available online;
• Requires trainers to change their teaching habits (e.g. use new ICT technologies)
• Usually is shorter than expected;
• Training is dependent on the quality of the training material and ICT platform used
Source: Specific survey of 27 BUILD UP Skills (Pillar II) and Horizon 2020 Construction skills projects; Presentations from
multiple BUS projects as presented in EU Exchange Meetings and own elaborations.
5.5. Recommendations
In conclusion to what has been said in this report, several key aspects are significant and may be taken
into consideration when choosing training methods:
• Depending on whether training targets blue or white-collar workers, either a more hands-on or a
more classroom-based approach is preferable.
• Work-based training is more suitable for the development of specific/ technical knowledge and/
or skills, while both classroom-based interactive training and mixed classroom and ICT training
may also be used to bring about attitudinal/ behaviour change.
• Work-based training is more suitable for blue-collar workers when the number of trainees is
limited to a fixed geographical location.
• Mixed classroom and ICT training is a good method to train large numbers of white-collar workers.
• Cross-craft interdisciplinary training is an important aspect which enables to present sustainable
construction as a system. This kind of training may only be offered via classroom-based or mixed
classroom and ICT training methods.
• Combination of methods, e.g. work-based training and classroom-based interactive training leads
to more effective training and may achieve wider training objectives.
• The most suitable method for training the trainers is classroom-based interactive training;
• Alternating between training venues and training methods (workshops for practical training and
classrooms for theoretical training) is advisable. Furthermore, training in stages where
theoretical training is followed by practical training is a good way to make training more
effective.
• It is advisable that at least 2/3 of training for workers for the development of specific
knowledge and/ or skills should be practical.
• Blue-collar workers prefer hands-on direct practical training to classroom-based training.
However, this type of training is expensive and a cheaper form of training, namely classroom-
based training is chosen instead. Yet, for classroom-based training qualified instructors are
necessary. The costs of training such trainers are also quite high and therefore it must be
evaluated whether the costs of training the trainers is more beneficial to providing work-based
training for achieving the training targets.
• Allocating more time for expert exchange and peer-to-peer interaction would be welcome. ICT
platforms could be a useful tool to enable such communication.
• Given the possibility, target group of training activities could be included in the development of
training methods.