Technical Working Group 3 Innovative training ... · Technical Working Group 3 Innovative training infrastructures, materials and methods Final Deliverable 1. Document details Authors

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



5. Training methods ................................................................................................... 25

5.1. Definition ............................................................................................................. 25

5.2. Major characteristics ............................................................................................... 25

5.3. Innovativeness ....................................................................................................... 32



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

http://www.mapchart.net/

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


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


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

http://www.bus-itown.eu/formazione-formatori/2

http://www.bus-itown.eu/formazione-formatori/2

http://i-town.labelacademy.com/

13 | P a g e


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.


The major characteristics of the training courses did not vary significantly between the different materials


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


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%


or skills

Development ofspecific/ technicalknowledge and/ or

skills




Other

Didactic Materials

Reference and training manuals

Software tools

© FORESEE Training Manual front

page (2016). Used with permission


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


19 | P a g e

Graph 6: Level of progress of activities for different types of training materials


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%




started


Other

Didactic materials

Reference and training manuals

Software tools

889450

2130

1150900500

10000

30003116

882

7150

2400

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000


trained so far


time of 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’).


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 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.


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




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


https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.esampedro.simuladorApp&hl=en

22 | P a g e


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




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.


The major characteristics of the training courses did not vary significantly between the training methods


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


8%

38%

8%

42%

4%

13%

63%

0%

8%

0%0%

33%

0%

67%

0%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%


or skills

Development ofspecific/ technical

knowledge and/ or skills




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


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%




started


Other


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


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


trained so far


time of project



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


• Most trainees were workers/ technicians (67% of all training methods)




• 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


http://www.buildupskillsnl.anewspring.com/

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


• 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).


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

http://proftrac.eu/open-training-platform-for-nzeb-professionals.html

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




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).

http://www.mens-nzeb.eu/en/

http://www.mens-nzeb.eu/en/

https://www.facebook.com/MEnSH2020/

34 | P a g e


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




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.

36 | P a g e

• Both classroom-based interactive training and mixed classroom and ICT training encourage

dialogue between the trainees. This could be an important aspect when attempting to promote

more interaction and a stronger sense of community between workers in the construction sector.

Documents

Technical Working Group 3 Innovative training ... · Technical Working Group 3 Innovative training infrastructures, materials and methods Final Deliverable 1. Document details Authors