Learner & Context Analysis

             Most students had no background knowledge in learning and instructional theory, so the content of this course was almost completely new to these students in a graduate-level course. However, I had to be cautious not to over-simplify, because one student—Michele—had earned her Master’s in HRD. In accordance with Newstrom & Lengnick-Hall’s (1991) assertion that “adult learners are a heterogeneous group requiring different approaches to training and development depending on individual differences across important characteristics” (p. 46), I modified my teaching style to mediate the needs of all students. Since Michele had completed her Master’s in HRD had completed that degree almost 20 years ago, I used our limited class meeting time to give an overview of the way our content fit together and relied on the students to read the book and work through the online modules to grasp the details. I paid close attention to the types of questions they asked during class and the quality of the work they submitted to assess their learning. Details on other pertinent learner characteristics are given in Table 1. 

Table 1: Learner Characteristics.

Analysis Category	General Student Characteristics
Age	Students in this class included a variety of ages, ranging from late twenties through early sixties.
Prior knowledge level	Three of four students were almost entirely new to learning and instructional theory, although most had gained some prior experience with training in the Merck workplace. Thus they had some implicit ideas about effective techniques and issues to consider during the design of instruction. The oldest student had obtained her Master’s in HRD, but a number of years had elapsed since her graduation.
Education level	There was a wide range of education levels represented in my classroom. Two students had Master’s degrees: one in HRD, as mentioned, and the other in chemical engineering. Another student obtained her Bachelor’s in engineering, and the sole male student had only a high school education.
Technology experience & proficiency	Most students exhibited a high degree of discomfort regarding the use of technology for instructional purposes. Canvas LMS was used for both presentation of content and assessment of learning. The youngest student exhibited proficiency with most all technology components.
Motivation level	The majority of learners were excited to learn material that would help them succeed in their new positions at Merck. However, I was told that the learner with a Master’s in HRD might have a less than positive attitude, which was indeed true during the initial couple of classes.

Context Analysis

         A general context analysis for this course would involve consideration of environmental factors at both Memorial Hall and Merck, as the class meetings were held at both locations. For this particular session, a classroom at Memorial Hall served as the location and will be the focus of this discussion. Because the students traveled a long distance and took time from work to attend this class in Harrisonburg, I felt a great deal of pressure to make the content and presentation “worth their while.”

            This room was small in size, which allowed for easier discussion and class participation, as well as a more intimate atmosphere to encourage the building of rapport between myself and the students. However, the technology in this room was less than ideal. For one thing, I could not find any presentation clickers that worked with my laptop, and I was unable to move around during my lecture because I needed to manually transition through the slides via my keyboard. The connecting cord between my laptop and the projector was too short to allow my computer to be positioned anywhere but on the edge of the front table. This necessitated my seated position as I navigated through the online learning module during our concluding discussion.