Methodological guide for trainers

Conducting activities on the POLCOM project educational portal

Extended version (methodological standard)

FEBRUARY 2026

1. Purpose of the guide and context of the POLCOM project

This methodological guide is a practical aid for lecturers who work with activities on the POLCOM project educational portal. Its purpose is to help lecturers make professional decisions during teaching in terms of what to choose, when to add structure, when to open up space, how to support learning in a group with different experiences and motivations, and other important methodological principles. The guide is based on the assumption that participants learn best when they understand the meaning, have the opportunity to try things out, reflect, and put their knowledge into practice.

We see the POLCOM portal as a collection of proven methods and activities. Whether these become real learning depends on facilitation and how you set up the educational framework. It is also crucial how you lead the work in the group and how you ask questions during reflection. That is why the handbook focuses on teaching skills, working with group dynamics, and methodological process management.

1.1 How to work with the handbook

• Use it as a checklist and as inspiration for modifying activities before training.
• For each activity, ask yourself: What is the educational goal? How will I know that the goal has been achieved? How should it be transferred into practice?
• Don't be afraid to make minor changes to the assignment, length, or format as long as you maintain the educational intent.
• Work more explicitly in an online/hybrid environment: what is obvious in a live setting must be described even better in a digital environment .

1.2 Role of the instructor

In the POLCOM project, the lecturer typically alternates between three roles: 1) content expert 2) group learning facilitator, and 3) learning experience designer. Switching between roles should be done consciously. Participants need to know when you are imparting expertise and when you are holding back so that they can gain knowledge on their own.

• Expert: short, clear inputs, providing expertise, a framework, or concepts for collaborative work.
• Facilitator: guides the group, maintains the structure of the discussion, promotes balance in participant involvement, cultivates a safe space, and keeps the group focused on the goal.
• Methodologist: chooses the method, format, and pace to make learning effective (not just fun). Always keeps in mind the purpose and educational goal of the topic and activity.

2. Methodological pillars: what supports learning

Below are the pillars that have proven effective across topics in practice. This is not theory for theory's sake—each pillar has a direct impact on whether an activity will be "checked off" or whether it will translate into skill and behavior change.

2.1 Relevance and motivation

Adult participants invest their attention selectively. If they don't see the benefit, the activity seems like a game to them. Therefore, always explicitly link the activity to the participants' reality: their roles, situations, and emphasis on effectiveness.

• Start with a specific practical problem (situation, dilemma, case), and only then add a model or concept.
• Do not assume the same motivation within the group. Offer multiple options: efficiency, relationships, safety, performance, quality.
• Perceive resistance as information: participants often defend their time, competence, or identity.

2.2 Safe environment and psychological safety

Psychological safety is not "comfort." It is an agreement that in a group, it is possible to try, make mistakes, ask questions, and disagree without ridicule. In activities where participants step outside their comfort zone (role-play, sharing experiences, feedback), this is a prerequisite for learning.

• Clear rules of communication (contract) are stronger than a general request for respect.
• Normalize mistakes as a source of data: "We are trying to see what works. A mistake is information, not a failure."
• For sensitive topics, give participants the option to choose the degree of sharing and the right to refuse an active role.

2.3 A structure that frees up capacity

A common mistake is either over-structuring (participants only follow instructions) or, conversely, freedom without a framework (time is wasted, loud participants drown out quiet ones). An experienced instructor works with structure as a tool, adding or subtracting as needed.

• For clear skills, add more steps and a practical demonstration.
• For complex topics, stick to the goal and time, but let the group find the way (facilitated discussion, case work).
• Always end with anchoring: what is "usable on Monday morning."

2.4 Experiential learning cycle

Most activities on the portal are implicitly based on experiential learning: participants experience something, describe it, name it, process it, and decide what to change. Without reflection and transfer, only the experience remains.

1. Experience (activity): participants do something, solve something, simulate something.
2. Review/Reflection: what happened, what we saw, what patterns emerged.
3. Naming and generalizing: why did it happen, how does it relate to theory/models.
4. Transfer: what will I use in practice, in what situation, and how will I know that it works.

3. Training preparation: from goals to activities

Quality facilitation begins before the training. Preparation is not just about "getting the materials ready." It is a didactic decision: what exactly should be the result, how to lead the group to it, and how to verify that it really happened.

3.1 Definition of the educational goal

The goal describes a change in the participant. The recommendation is to work with three levels: knowledge (I know), skill (I can), attitude/strategic choice (I want/I prioritize). In practice, goals that are too general (e.g., "improve communication") fail the most.

• Formulate the objective as observable behavior: "The participant can...," "The participant knows how to use...," "The participant chooses...".
• Consider the level: explain - analyze - apply - create. Not every training course should aim for the highest level, but it must be a conscious process.
• Write down 2-3 indicators in advance that will help you recognize when the goal has been achieved (output, decision, quality argument, change in procedure).

3.2 Selection of activities and their sequence

Choose activities based on their purpose, not their attractiveness. A good composition has logic: from easier to more demanding, from safe sharing to exposed situations. Also consider how you will return to the topic in different formats—the same concept can be practiced first in small groups (pairs, trios), then in a simulation, and finally in a plenary session.

• Beginners: more structure, shorter steps, more frequent comprehension checks, clear examples.
• Advanced: more open-ended tasks, working with dilemmas, complex case studies, reflection on boundaries and ethical aspects.
• Heterogeneous group: prepare different levels of difficulty (same framework, different depth of task).

Methodological note: If you have several activities with a similar goal in your program, it is better to do one in depth (including reflection) than two "half-hearted" ones. Transfer happens in quiet work and decision-making, not in rapid alternation.

3.3 Group diagnostics and initial information

The more you know about the group in advance, the less you will improvise under pressure. It is useful to briefly find out who the participants are, what they are dealing with, what they have already tried, and what they expect. Diagnostics does not have to be a formal questionnaire—sometimes a phone call with the client or a short pre-work is enough.

• Experience and role: in what role does the participant use the given skills (manager, specialist, coordinator, volunteer, etc.).
• Context: what situations are most common and stressful for them (conflict, time pressure, public communication, etc.).
• Motivation and concerns: what they want to gain and what they fear (evaluation, performance, "embarrassment").
• Logistics: time, environment, technology, language, any specific limitations (health, accessibility).

3.4 Materials, space, and accessibility

Space and materials are not just "technical." They directly influence interaction. Before you prepare the aids, consider how communication should take place: plenary, small groups, pairs, movement in space, work on a flipchart, etc.

• Discussion: circle or U-shape so that people can see each other; the instructor stands outside the center so as not to hold power.
• Teamwork: small tables, flipcharts for groups, clearly marked materials for each group.
• Safety and accessibility: space for movement, possibility to sit aside, accessibility for people with specific needs.
• Visualization: prepare a system for capturing outputs (flipchart, whiteboard, shared document, online tools such as Mentimeter, Miro, Kahoot, online whiteboard, or mind mapping applications).

3.5 Online vs. hybrid mode: technology as a didactic factor

In an online environment, the "space" becomes a virtual classroom and the rules of work change. Predictability is key here: participants need to know where things are happening, how to sign up, where to find materials, and how group work will proceed. Technical distractions quickly reduce attention.

• Check the stability of your connection, microphone, and camera; have a backup device or at least a mobile hotspot.
• Prepare links, shared documents, and templates in advance. Don't leave the creation of the structure to the last minute.
• For breakout rooms, set a clear task, time, and expected output. Appoint a facilitator and note-taker in each group.
• Plan for shorter blocks (typically 60-90 minutes) and more frequent micro-breaks.

3.6 Schedule and scenario (including reserves)

The schedule is an energy management tool. It is recommended to plan in three layers: (1) minimum option - if you are running late, (2) standard option, and (3) extended option - if the group is moving quickly and wants to go into depth. Ideally, prepare a precise schedule (minute-by-minute).

• Introduction and framework: 10-15% of total time (quick introduction, but high-quality setup).
• Activities: 50-60% of the time (the experience, group work, and testing are key).
• Reflection and transfer: 20-30% of the time (do not shorten this part, otherwise everything before it will be devalued).

3.7 Plan B: prepared adjustments without losing sight of the goal

Plan B is not last-minute improvisation. It is a set of pre-planned alternatives that maintain the same goal but change the form. It is recommended to have at least two alternatives for key activities: for few people, for many people, and for lack of time.

• Change in the number of participants: groups -> pairs, or vice versa, pairs -> trios; for the whole group, use a structured round with a timer.
• Shortening the time: shorten the collection of contributions, not the reflection; work with prioritization (for example, participants mention only the 3 most important points).
• Low energy: add movement, quick voting, short individual preparation before discussion.
• Online tool failure: prepare a "low-tech" version (chat, shared document, voting by reactions).

4. Introduction to the training and creating a safe environment

The introduction determines whether participants will accept the way of working. In the first 10 minutes, they answer two questions: "Is this relevant to me?" and "Is it safe and meaningfully led?" If you set up the introduction well, you will save yourself pressure on activity later on.

4.1 Introduction structure that works in practice

1. Welcome and framework: briefly introduce the topic and rules of cooperation (do not read the agenda).
2. Relevance: show 2-3 specific situations where the topic will be relevant and what it will save/improve for people.
3. Contract: how we will work, what is acceptable within the rules (asking questions, disagreeing), what is not acceptable (ridiculing, interrupting).
4. Check-in: a short question that connects participants to the topic and gives you quick feedback.
5. Expectations: gathering and quickly working through expectations (what we will cover, what we won't, what needs to be rearranged).

4.2 Working with expectations: how to prevent frustration

Work actively with expectations. It is not enough to just write them down. For each expectation, decide: (a) is it within the scope of the training objective, (b) is it outside the scope, or (c) is it partially represented. A transparent agreement reduces passive resistance from participants and increases engagement.

• In person: expectations on cards/post-its, grouped into thematic areas, quick comments.
• Online: expectations in a chat or shared online board, the instructor summarizes everything and follows up with the program.
• Always state what you will learn today and what there may not be time for. In this case, offer where participants can find the information (e.g., on the portal, in a follow-up module).

4.3 Setting rules for cooperation

Rules work when they are short, understandable, and meaningful. Four to six rules are recommended. If you want people to use chat, work with chat actively. If you want them to speak up, respond consistently.

• One person speaks, the others try not to interrupt. Disagreement is welcome, but personal attacks are not.
• Everyone has the right to skip personal sharing (continue without explanation).
• We stick to the time: short contributions, the lecturer works visibly with the time.
• Online: how we raise our hands (hand icon), where we ask questions (chat), where we save outputs (link).

4.4 Specifics of the virtual environment

In a virtual environment, the instructor's role is more visible. If you are unclear, the group will break up into parallel activities. Be precise and explicit: what we are doing now, how long, where the output is, and what will follow.

• Communicate expectations around cameras and microphones in a way that makes sense (not as a command).
• Limit the number of tools: one shared document is better than three applications.
• Work with "micro-interactions": reactions, quick polls, a question in the chat every 5-10 minutes.
• Assign roles in groups: who keeps track of time, who takes notes, who presents.

5. Leading activities: practical procedure and teaching skills

An activity is not just an assignment. From a methodological point of view, it always has four parts: (1) framework and purpose, (2) instructions and organization, (3) facilitation during work, (4) reflection and anchoring. Mistakes typically occur in transitions—when the instructor moves on to the next part without closing the previous one.

5.1 Framework: why we do it

Set the framework specifically. Instead of "we will do a communication activity," use: "Now we will map three barriers that we encounter in practice. At the end, everyone will choose one barrier they want to work on."

• Say what the output will be (a list of barriers, an agreement, arguments, a plan of action).
• Say how long it will take and how we will know when we are done.
• Indicate how the outcome will be used later (follow-up reflection, next activity, task in the portal).

5.2 Instructions: clarity, brevity, and checking for understanding

Instructions are the most sensitive point. Instructions that are too long create cognitive overload and participants ask questions about what has already been said. Instructions that are too short lead to chaos and wasted time. The ideal is a simple procedure and the possibility to return to it (visibly on a flip chart/in a shared document).

• Explain step by step. Pause briefly after each step.
• Use a specific example or micro-demonstration (30-60 seconds).
• Don't check with the question "Is that clear?" - instead, let the participant repeat the assignment: "Who can summarize what the first step is?"
• For difficult tasks, write the instructions in a visible place (flipchart, slide, chat).

5.3 Organization of work: groups, roles, outputs

For group work, determine in advance how you will collect the results. Without this, the outputs will be lost and reflection will be weak. Personally, it pays to assign the role of note-taker in advance: it increases the quality of the work and the instructor has material for summarizing.

• Group size: 2-3 for quick sharing, 4-6 for creation, 6+ only with a clear structure (otherwise the loudest voices will dominate).
• Roles: facilitator (oversees the process), note-taker (captures ideas), timekeeper (keeps track of time), presenter.
• Output: 3 points on a flip chart, 1 slide, 1 paragraph in a document, or a short decision (what we are changing).
• Quality criteria: say how you recognize a good output (concreteness, feasibility, connection to practice).

5.4 Facilitation during work: when to intervene and when not to

An experienced instructor is present during the work, but does not "control" it. They walk around the groups, listen, ask questions, notice patterns, and collect data for reflection. Intervention is appropriate when the group deviates from the goal, gets stuck, or when the activity threatens safety.

• Monitoring: listen for 30-60 seconds before asking questions.
• Supportive questions: "What is your goal?", "What options do you have?", "What would you do in a real situation?"
• Minimize "lectures to the group." Instead, ask a question that will move them forward.
• Write down your observations and quotes—then you can work with real material in your reflection, not abstractions.

5.5 Working with time and energy

Time signals are not "rushing." They help people finish their thoughts. Use at least two signals: in the middle (approximate) and at the end (last minute). For longer work, add a checkpoint: "where are you."

• Signals: "5 minutes left," "last 2 minutes," "finish your conclusion and choose a speaker."
• When energy is low, shorten the work and increase interaction in the plenary (quick voting, sharing in pairs).
• Alternate formats roughly every 20-30 minutes, but not mechanically—be guided by fatigue and the quality of the discussion.

5.6 Closing the activity: reflection that makes an impact

Reflection is not "What did you like?". It is a guided process that transforms experience into insight and decision. A practical structure that works almost universally is: What happened - What does it mean - What will I do with it.

1. What happened (facts): what we saw, what we did, what patterns emerged.
2. What does it mean (interpretation): why was it that way, what does it say about our topic, what are the connections.
3. What will I do about it (application): what will I use from this, what steps will I take, what do I need to make it work.

Methodological note: If the instructor "narrates" the reflection, the participant will not connect with their own knowledge. Speak less in the reflection than in the assignment. Your role is to ask good questions, summarize, and anchor.

6. What to do and what not to do: recommendations by type of activity

Below are methodological recommendations for the most common types of activities. These are not rigid rules, but rather a way to prevent typical failures. For each type, I also give the "why," because understanding the reason is more important than mechanical compliance.

6.1 Icebreakers and warm-ups

The purpose of icebreakers is not to "entertain," but to reduce social tension, raise participants' voices, and create a first experience of safe interaction. They work best when they are thematically relevant.

• Do: link the question to the topic (e.g., "What was the last communication situation you dealt with under pressure?").
• Do: offer a choice (speak/write in the chat/share in pairs).
• Don't: require personal disclosures that may be sensitive (family, finances, health).
• Don't: have a long round with large groups without a time limit—it will create boredom and resistance.

6.2 Discussion and round

Discussions without structure often slip into "stories" that are interesting but do not contribute to learning. Structure means: a clear question, time, rules for the length of contributions, and a way to engage quiet participants.

• Do: state a specific question and time (e.g., 7 minutes, maximum 30 seconds per contribution).
• Do: work with paraphrasing and summarizing—identify what is being repeated and bring it back to the group.
• Don't: let one person dominate. Intervene early, politely, and objectively.
• Don't: don't push quiet people to speak in front of the whole group; offer them a partner or written input first.

6.3 Brainstorming

Brainstorming is effective when the generation phase and the evaluation phase are properly separated. If evaluation begins too early, the group will run out of ideas and only the most confident members will remain active.

• Do: first collect quantity (without criticism), then sort and select.
• Do: start with silent writing (1-2 minutes) - this will increase the number of ideas and engage introverts.
• Don't: tolerate comments such as "that won't work" or "we've already tried that" in the first phase.
• Don't: collect ideas without subsequent prioritization - participants will then feel that there is no result.

6.4 Role-play and simulation

Role-play is one of the most powerful methods for practicing behavior, but it also poses the greatest threat to safety. Without a framework, participants will either "play" or withdraw. They need clear roles, goals, and an agreement on how we will work with feedback.

• Do: give roles, context, and a specific goal (e.g., "negotiate," "refuse," "get approval").
• Do: define the rules for feedback (description - impact - alternative) and start with positive observations.
• Do: use a short "stop" and reset if the situation escalates or loses direction.
• Don't: leave improvisation without a framework and without debriefing.
• Don't: expose one participant "on stage" without support - work in pairs or trios in exposed situations.

6.5 Debriefing and reflection

Debriefing is where learning takes place. If you skip it, the participant will take away an impression, but not a named procedure. It is worth planning debriefing as carefully as the activity itself.

• Do: prepare 5-7 questions according to the structure of fact - meaning - application.
• Do: work with different formats (silent writing, pairs, plenary) to involve those who do not like to speak.
• Don't: immediately say "the right solution." Let participants come to the conclusion themselves, and only then fill in the framework.
• Do not: end the reflection without an action step. At least one specific commitment increases transfer.

7. Handling difficult and unexpected situations

Challenging situations are not uncommon. Often they are not "about people" but about unmet needs: relevance, recognition, security, control over time. The instructor should protect both the group goal and the individual. The key is to respond calmly, promptly, and with respect.

7.1 First step: self-regulation and diagnosis

• Stop for a second. Slow down your breathing. This will reduce the risk of a defensive reaction.
• Ask yourself: does this threaten the educational goal, or just my comfort?
• Separate the person from the behavior. Describe the behavior objectively, without labeling ("I noticed that...").

7.2 Group protection: prevention and clear boundaries

Good boundaries are not harsh. They serve the group. If the instructor allows disruption without reacting, the group loses trust and silent resistance grows.

• Refer back to the rules you agreed on (contract).
• Use "we" language: "We need to hear more voices."
• If necessary, take a short break or change the format (pairs, silent writing).

7.3 Typical situations and recommended interventions

7.3.1 Technical problems

• Be transparent: "I'm having a technical problem, I need 2 minutes."
• Assign a meaningful task: discussion in pairs, silent reflection, work in chat.
• Have a backup: PDF presentation, offline notes, option to continue without screen sharing.
• Once resolved, return and conclude: summarize what happened and continue smoothly.

7.3.2 Dominant participant

Dominance can be a sign of engagement, but also a need for control. The longer you wait, the harder it is to intervene. The basic technique is to acknowledge the content and redirect the process.

• Formulation: "Thank you, that's useful. Now I need to give space to others - who has a different perspective?"
• Use the following structure: time limit, one round at a time, recording ideas quietly at first.
• If that doesn't help: offer a role (e.g., note-taker) or address the issue individually during a break.

7.3.3 Unengaged group, low energy

Low energy does not necessarily mean disinterest. It could be fatigue, confusion, an overly abstract topic, or fear of evaluation.

• Diagnosis: quick "thermometer" 1-10 in chat/raising fingers.
• Change the format: switch to pairs, add movement, shorten the input, give a specific example.
• Raise relevance: "Where will you deal with this tomorrow at work? Let's look at specific situations."
• Allow for silence: sometimes people need a minute for individual preparation.

7.3.4 Silent participant

Silence can mean thinking, not resistance. In practice, it has proven useful to offer less exposed forms of participation first.

• Start with writing: everyone writes down two ideas, then shares them in pairs.
• In the plenary, offer a choice: "If you want, add one sentence to the chat."
• Individual contact during the break: "What would help you get involved in a way that makes you feel comfortable?"

7.3.5 Conflict in the group

Conflict is sometimes useful—it reveals different perspectives. The problem is personal conflict, which threatens safety.

• Stop the dynamic: "Hold on a moment. I hear two different points of view."
• Paraphrase both sides neutrally and check for understanding: "Am I right in understanding that..."
• Return to the goal: "How will this help us resolve the situation we are practicing today?"
• If the conflict becomes personal: set boundaries and, if necessary, move the solution outside the plenary session.

8. Evaluation, reflection, and transfer: so that learning does not remain in the classroom

A good conclusion is the most important part because it ensures that the experience is transformed into lasting learning. It has three functions: creating insights, prioritizing, and transferring into practice. Skipping the conclusion is the most common methodological mistake when slipping.

8.1 Recommended time and structure of the conclusion

The recommended minimum for the conclusion is 20-30 minutes (or more for a full-day training session). If you are running behind schedule, shorten other parts, not the conclusion.

1. Summary of the big picture: what we explored today, how it all fits together.
2. Individual reflection: everyone writes down 2-3 key insights and one question.
3. Action plan: one specific step to put into practice (what, when, in what situation, how will I know if I'm successful).
4. Check-out: a brief social moment (one word, one sentence, gratitude, biggest surprise).

8.2 Transfer tools

Transfer is supported when participants make small decisions and have support for them. It is recommended to work with the principle of "small commitments" and subsequent reminders (e.g., on the portal or by email).

• Action plan 1-1-1: one step, within one week, in one specific situation.
• Peer commitment: pairs tell each other what they will try and agree on a short follow-up.
• Reflective question for practice: "When did I use the new approach today? What did it change?"
• Material on the portal: recommend a specific module/activity as reinforcement or follow-up training.

8.3 Quality assessment and feedback

Evaluation is not just a satisfaction questionnaire. It should give you data for improvement. It is recommended to combine quick formative signals during training with a short final collection.

• Plus/Delta: what worked, what to adjust next time (quick, effective).
• One thing I'm taking away - one thing I need to add.
• Short self-assessment of skills (scale 1-5) before/after the block - shows progress.
• For skills: observation and a simple rubric (e.g., argument structure, working with questions, working with emotions).

9. Professional standards for trainers in the POLCOM project

Methodological quality is also based on ethics and professionalism. This is especially true when training deals with specific cases of participants or sensitive topics.

• Confidentiality: what is said in the group stays in the group (unless otherwise agreed).
• Respect for diversity: different experiences, roles, and opinions are a source of learning; the instructor ensures that this does not become humiliating.
• Neutrality and fairness: the trainer does not "label" participants; they evaluate behavior and process, not personality.
• Working with power: the instructor is aware of their influence and uses it to support learning, not to assert their ego.
• Accessibility: the instructor allows for different ways of participating (speaking, writing, working in pairs).

9.1 Instructor self-reflection

Teaching is a craft. After each training session, take a moment to reflect: what worked, where did the group lose energy, which instructions were unclear, where did you intervene too much and where too little? This reflection is the fastest way to improve quality.

• 3 questions after training: What went well? What would I do differently? What do I want to keep an eye on next time?
• Collect your own phrases that work (sentences for redirecting, closing, summarizing).
• If possible, ask for peer observation (a colleague observes the process, not the content).

10) Working with sensitive content (incident, trauma, violence)

10.1 Purpose and definition

This section sets out rules for working with teaching content that may be emotionally stressful for participants (e.g., violent crimes, accidents involving injury/death, domestic violence, working with children, mass disasters, high-risk situations). The goal is to:

• maintain the psychological safety of participants,
• enable learning and professional development without retraumatization,
• set clear boundaries for sharing and processing case studies.

10.2 Principles of safe work

1. Voluntary sharing
   No one is obliged to share personal experiences. Sharing is voluntary and must not be enforced, even indirectly (e.g., through peer pressure).
2. Minimization of details and "no requirement for shocking elements"
   Teaching is based on the analysis of decisions and procedures, not on explicit details. The lecturer actively prevents the group from getting "stuck" in harsh details.
3. Normalization of reactions
   Emotional reactions are legitimate. The instructor names and anchors them ("this is a common reaction to a difficult topic") without psychologizing the participants.
4. The "STOP–PAUSE–CHOICE" rule
   Participants have the right to say STOP at any time / ask for a break / choose a different way of participating (observing instead of playing an active role, temporarily leaving the room).
5. Dignity of persons in case studies
   Victims, suspects, perpetrators, and interveners are referred to in respectful language; derogatory nicknames and trivialization are not used.

10.3 Lecturer's procedure in case of signs of participant overload

Signs: silence, trembling, crying, marked irritability, leaving, dissociation, inability to continue.
Recommended procedure:

1. Stop or tone down the activity, take a break.
2. Offer a choice: observation / change of role / leaving for a while.
3. Briefly and privately check on the participant's condition ("What do you need right now to feel safe?").
4. Do not engage in therapy, do not ask for details.
5. If necessary, refer to the designated support contact (psychologist, peer support, supervisor according to the organization's rules).

10.4 Debriefing on sensitive topics

The debriefing is led by the instructor, primarily focusing on:

• to facts and decisions ("What was the goal? What information was available? What were the options?"),
  to professional principles (safety, proportionality, communication, coordination),
• transfer to practice ("What will we do the same next time, what will we do differently, what will we do systematically?").
  

11. Skills assessment and standardization (rubrics, observation, evaluation)

11.1 Purpose of assessment

Assessment within experiential and scenario-based activities should serve to:

• for development (formative feedback),
• to verify standards (summative assessment of critical skills),
• for recording in the education system (verifiability and comparability).
  

11.2 What we assess

Recommended categories (can be mapped to an internal competency model):

1. Decision-making and tactics (situational awareness, choice of options, risk management)
2. Legality, legitimacy, and proportionality (procedures within the limits of authority, appropriateness)
3. Communication (with colleagues, with the public, de-escalation)
4. Coordination and teamwork (roles, information sharing, leadership/followership)
5. Safety and self-protection (own safety, safety of surroundings, control of space)
6. Professionalism and ethics (respect, impartiality, working with power)
   

11.3 Assessment tools

A) Observation sheet (checklist)

• Used for clearly defined steps/procedures,
• suitable for “yes/no” items (e.g., notification, requesting backup, securing the area).
  

B) Rating scale (1–4)

Suitable for complex competencies (communication, decision-making).
Recommended levels:

1. Does not meet expectations – jeopardizes the goal/safety/legitimacy, requires intervention by the instructor
2. Beginner – meets minimum requirements, but with significant reservations
3. Good result – stable performance, minor reservations, safe and lawful
4. Excellent result – proactive, model performance, clear transfer to practice
   

11.4 Standardization of evaluators

To ensure that the results are comparable:

1. Calibration before the course
   Assessors review the rubric and agree on the interpretation of criteria (examples of behavior for each level).
   Anchoring examples
   For selected competencies, create 2–3 short descriptions of "typical behavior" for levels 2/3/4.
2. Double assessment for highly important outputs
   For certification parts, recommend two assessors or a subsequent review.
3. Recording evidence
   The assessor records observations as behavior ("said..., did..., decided...") rather than impressions ("seemed uncertain").
   

11.5 Recording and working with results

• For formative assessment, a record is kept for the participant (developmental).
• For summative assessment, a record is kept for the system (meeting the standard).
• The results are used to identify what most often fails → adjustment of teaching.
  

Appendices

A. Training preparation checklist

The checklist is divided according to when it is realistic to do things. In practice, it significantly reduces stress on the day of the training.

B. Activity scenario template

Use the template for key activities. It helps maintain focus and simplifies instructions.

C. Bank of questions for debriefing

Select 5-7 questions according to time and type of activity. It's not about quantity, but quality.

Facts (what happened)

• What specific first steps did you take during the activity?
• Where did the group get stuck and why?
• What strategies emerged across the groups?

Meaning (what it means)

• What does this tell us about how we normally respond under pressure?
• What assumptions did we make, and were they correct?
• How does this relate to the model/concept we discussed?

Application (what will I do with this)

• What one thing do you want to try differently in the next real-life situation?
• What might prevent you from doing so, and how will you deal with it?
• How will you know that it works (success indicator)?

D. Sample phrases for challenging situations

• Redirection: "Thank you. Let me stop you there for a moment, I need to hear other perspectives as well."
• Staying on track: "Interesting. Let's get back to the question we're practicing today: ..."
• Working with disagreement: "I hear disagreement. Let's unpack it: where exactly do you differ and what does that mean in practice?"
• Boundaries: "This is getting personal. Let's get back to behavior/procedure. If necessary, we'll discuss it after the break."
• Normalizing mistakes: "This is exactly the type of data we work with. Mistakes show us what we need to practice."

Finally, remember that this guide is intended to support quality teaching decisions in real-life situations: stick to the educational goal, monitor the energy and safety of the group, and adjust the structure, challenge, and pace accordingly. The activity itself will not teach much—what matters is how you put it into context, how clearly you set the rules, how you work with participants during the activity, and how you reflect on it in relation to practice afterwards. Work with the portal as a means, not as an end: treat it as a source of situations, models, and stimuli to help participants realize, try out, and transfer something to their own circumstances. When something goes wrong, don't immediately look for "faults in people"—first check the framework (relevance, instructions, roles, time, safety) and don't be afraid to switch to a simpler option or take a step back and identify what is happening in the group. Whether you are conducting training in person or online, thorough preparation, ongoing evaluation, and a disciplined conclusion with specific action steps work best; this is where it is decided whether time well spent will turn into real progress.

Appendix 1 : Competency assessment section https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mqoRhDf9Kv2og1kATXBGJkvXt0AbTN3O/edit

Appendix: Observation sheet (checklist) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZFsl9JDJFCSW6VFTv438-oIiX7yyJaqH/edit