Individualization

The principle of Individualization is one that, to many, may be clear: like writing students, online instructor-trainees have individual ways to approach their online orientation and teaching. Some find themselves looking more broadly at online instruction and then breaking it down to its subparts, while others need to build their own understanding of online instruction through successive steps (Apps 34). Individualization as an educational principle, therefore, leads to training that is modified or customized to address the needs of individual participants.

Among the characteristics of a training program that engages the principle of Individualization are:

• A combination of systematic yet flexible training. Our experience has been that an online training program serves both administrative and instructor-trainees' needs when the program itself is systematized. For example, the training might include outcomes or touchstones that every trainee must address satisfactorily, with some occurring concurrently and the others occurring in a more linear fashion. However, it seems important to balance an effective system with learners' needs for flexibility. Therefore, building into the program some flexible time frames or the ability to repeat a learning module or cycle are ways to encourage instructor-trainees who learn at different rates.
  
• Training that is human-adaptive. We think that the principle of Individualization is best served in online writing instruction by addressing instructor-trainees' needs for human instruction or mentoring (rather than static content or artificial intelligence). To be sure, computer-adaptive training has its place (perhaps particularly with orienting instructors to the technology itself). However, because online writing instructors ultimately will be interacting with live students -- albeit through technology -- the human relationship is essential. Human-adaptive training includes such components as:
  • Providing a live trainer's response to the trainee's writing, simulations, and exercises, which is analogous to providing a live reader's response to student writing;
  • Giving trainers background information about instructor-trainees that enable them to understand each trainee as a colleague with prior background knowledge and a learner with abilities to learn new skills; and
  • Asking that the trainees demonstrate what they already know about online instruction, which enables the trainer to tailor feedback and guidance to the individual.
    
• Acceptance of differences between learning in traditional face-to-face and online educational settings. The notion that people learn differently is widely accepted. That those differences can be exaggerated in online situations is a consideration with which program directors must grapple. Some trainees, for example, might be more comfortable with technological tools than others; perhaps they were educated with those tools in their schools or have used them in other settings. If such technological skills tend to be more difficult for other trainees, however, they might feel less capable as potential online instructors. Although this response is understandable, they and their trainers need to know about various differences between the two learning environments. For example, these same trainees might have other strengths like non-verbal communication or an ability to translate traditionally oral pedagogy into a text-based environment; realizing and accepting such strengths can help them to think about their learning challenges in different or more productive ways.
  
• Recognition of different learning styles. In an oftentimes text-based online educational setting, those who are verbal learners may have an advantage that program directors and trainers can build upon. Visual learners might find themselves needing to adapt their learning style or to explore and use technology that engages their strengths. For example, in synchronous modalities, visually-strong instructor-trainees might gravitate toward whiteboard platforms with graphical tools, while verbally strong trainees might prefer chat. Knowing such preferences may help them to adapt their instruction according to online student needs. A consideration of individual learner preferences for group or individual learning settings may also be beneficial to program directors and trainers.