Learning: Key Concerns in the Grounds Care Industry that can drive learning 
If an individual is, or should be, concerned about something then this can act as a key driver for them to learn to improve their own capability and performance. Finding something to get motivated about is the first stage of a learning process, it initiates engagement with a learning journey and the desire to change an individual’s current situation to something else. Caring for, having an interest in or wanting to have an interest in, or having a concern for something can be considered the primary spark for having the motivation to learn.
This affective context for learning (which is having an emotional connection to that which is to be or is being learnt) is one of Bloom’s three domains of learning and is the underpinning core of human-centred learning design which is persuasively argued for by Nick Shackleton-Jones in his book ‘How People Learn. A new model of learning and cognition to improve performance and education’ (2023, 2nd Edition, Kogan Page), as well underpinning the application of neuroscience to learning as demonstrated by Stella Collins in her book ,‘Neuroscience for Learning and Development. How to apply neuroscience and psychology for improved learning and training’, (2024, 3rd Edition, Kogan Page). Other established learning theories also include affective elements, although not as the primary focus described by Shackleton-Jones and Collins.
Learning theory examples include Kolb’s experiential learning reflective stage, with learner’s aiming to make an emotional connection with their learning experiences; Vygotsky’s development of social interactions and emotional connections to support learning; and Bandura’s social learning theory, in particular how attitudes and emotional responses of others could shape a learner’s behaviour. However, there are affective elements within most theories.
From an affective context, what might be some of the key concerns (or cares or interests to initiate the motivation to learn), which would then be a focus for learning design, commonly encountered in the grounds care industry?
- Wanting to do it right. Making sure that the maintenance work that is carried out is appropriate and carried out to a satisfactory standard.
- Wanting to provide a suitable, cost-effective and safe playing surface.
- Not wanting to waste money on unnecessary materials, equipment or maintenance activities.
- Making sure match cancellations are kept to a minimum.
- Getting more people involved in the industry.
- Identifying what equipment and material that is needed for a specific pitch and prevailing conditions.
- Understanding the limitations and disadvantages of particular equipment and material use. How well does it work in practice and how might it impact on pitch performance or maintenance schedule? For a material this might be the longer-term impact it has on a surface or how it interacts with other conditions in the soil or surface, whilst for equipment it might be how well it performs in wetter, colder conditions.
- Finding a suitable supplier for equipment and material.
- Getting appropriate insurance for the grounds maintenance assets that are held.
- Identifying suitable contractors for specific works, for example regular maintenance, ad hoc maintenance activities such as decompaction, fertiliser or pesticide application, end of season renovations, mole drainage, or pipe drainage / sand-slit or banding works.
Instead of focusing on learning objectives, which has been the approach to learning design for decades, providing a journey that helps an individual learn for the modern workplace may well require a change of emphasis. The key is to define the expected performance outcomes rather than a typical knowledge transfer of ‘knowing’ about something, which often turns out to be dumping a load of content into someone’s head. This is then either ignored or readily forgotten with the end result being that little or no learning actually takes place.
If someone reflects on something they have learnt, there will usually be a significant affective influence which contributed to this. In this context, learning means something that has resulted in the person changing their behaviour so they can do something better than before. This might be through a physical task or recalling more easily an insightful or useful piece information, which is understanding how knowledge is applied rather than just regurgitation of some information from memory. The most likely factor in successful learning would be that of emotional engagement (which is an affective condition) with the subject matter. They will have been interest in and cared about what was being learnt, being concerned enough to find out more so as to improve their performance.
Unfortunately, a lot of the time in ‘learning’ is spent on learning objectives which are of no interest or concern to an individual. They will usually achieve the required learning objectives and course outcomes, provide the necessary tick in the box for the training organisation, but with little, valued, learning taking place (where learning is defined as changing behaviours and improving performance as a consequence of the learning). Obviously if training programmes are funded on the basis of students achieving learning objectives, then quite reasonably this is what courses will be designed around.
Changing the emphasis from learning objectives to performance improvements could help to encourage a more engaged learner, because they will be concerned about the issues being covered and how they are covered, and this will result in someone who is more likely to continue learning throughout their working career. Human-centred learning design offers a tangible approach to making a difference to learners in helping then stay interested and engaged and to improve their performance as an outcome. In practice some current learning programmes may need a significant redesign, whilst others may only need a nuanced change to provide a more focused realignment to being more human centred and affective.
Improving performance and productivity is a key business objective, yet many learning programmes appear to fail to meet these requirements, primarily being evidenced by the continuing skills and labour shortages in many industries. Quite possibly a more serious look needs to be taken to explore what is meant by learning for the modern age and future proofing of skills and learning outcomes, as well as the funding mechanisms used to facilitate learning.