Did It Land?

At a glance

Duration	90 minutes. Session 3 of 3, a week after Session 2
Group	4–12. One facilitator can get round about 8; beyond that, a co-facilitator
Canvas boxes	Outcomes → Evidence → Follow-through, then the whole canvas
Running artefact	The same session, now with outcomes, evidence and a follow-through plan
Shape	The blorps retest, try what you made, two paper sorts (evidence, verbs), rewrite the outcomes, check alignment, negotiate follow-through, then the reveal
The commitment	No card. The completed canvas, plus one named person who will hold them to it, and the support agreed with them

Learning outcomes

These are the content’s suggested outcomes. If your cohort’s differ, agree changes at setup.

By the end of the session, participants will have:

1. Sorted evidence from a teaching programme by what it actually shows, from delivered to impact. (Card sort)
2. Rewritten one to three outcomes for their own session using verbs someone could observe. (Verb wall · Rewrite)
3. Matched each outcome to evidence at the right level of Miller’s pyramid, and checked their slides and activity against it. (Rewrite · Does it line up?)
4. Completed a design canvas for their session, including a 30/60/90-day follow-through plan, a named person who will hold them to it, and the support they need from that person. (Follow-through · The reveal)

Before the session

The deck and printables

The Day 3 deck: 19 slides (one alternative hidden) plus hidden credits, on the Day 1 template. Diagrams build click by click; the notes carry timings and prompts.

Print before the session:

The blorps retest slips are in the Session 2 printables.

Who goes first

Ask 2–3 people during the week whether they’re happy to run their Menti or Kahoot on the group. Check their links work.

Room and kit

• Blorps retest slips (and last week’s tally)
• Evidence sort: one mat and one shuffled card set per table
• Can you see it?: the two mats and one shuffled verb set per table
• Design canvases (A4), two each
• Participants’ Session 1 slides and Session 2 designs (they bring them)
• Paper feedback forms
• Visible timer

Session flow

0–2 · Blorps retest (unannounced)

• Hand out the retest slips. Score 1 per meaning roughly right. Tally Group A (re-read) vs Group B (self-test) next to last week’s numbers.
• Expected: the self-testers hold up better over a week (Roediger & Karpicke 2006). Whatever the result, SAY: that was spaced retrieval. And how would you know something stuck? That’s today.

2–10 · Show us what you made

• 2–3 people run their Menti or Kahoot on the group, 2–3 minutes each, from their phone or your laptop. Not done? ASK: what got in the way?
• WHY: closes the Session 2 loop and puts the thing to real use. → retrieval practice
• FALLBACK: tech fails → they read their questions aloud; the room answers on fingers.

10–21 · How would you know? → Delivered ≠ changed

• ASK: how would you know it stuck? Take two or three answers (smile sheets will come up). Don’t resolve it.
• Sort (6 min): a made-up four-day programme with photos, packs and eight commitments, and nobody knows what changed. Each table places its 18 cards on the mat: Delivered → Produced → Implemented → Impact.
• The staircase slide (one step per click, with the Kirkpatrick level on each): “most training stops here”, then “what you did today”: running what you made on the group was use, Level 3-type evidence, inside the room.
• SAY: counts show it happened, not that anything changed. Level 1 has a narrow, real use: the cold room, the venue nobody could find.
• WHY: Kirkpatrick, and the New World version’s point that Level 3 depends on what happens after training.

21–33 · Can you see it? → Miller’s pyramid

• Sort (8 min): verb cards into Yes, I could watch someone do it / No. Then put the “yes” verbs on the pyramid mat: knows about · knows how · shows how · does. Expect laughter at “be aware of”: the pilot’s best moment.
• The pyramid slide builds tier by tier; “be aware of” lands below it: can’t see it, can’t evidence it.
• SAY: the verb picks the level. “Demonstrates” needs someone to watch; “does” means in practice. Where it happens matters too: “explain to a patient on the ward” is does.
• WHY: links outcomes straight to evaluation. → Miller’s pyramid; verb lists from revised Bloom (Anderson & Krathwohl 2001).

33–53 · Rewrite your outcomes

• SAY: your session (or one you’d like to teach). One to three outcomes, a verb you can see, and the evidence for each. On the canvas: Outcomes and Evidence. Pairs, then 2–3 share.
• ASK the pairs: can you see it? Does the evidence sit at the same level as the verb?
• WHY: constructive alignment in practice; peer rewrites are the worked examples.
• IF SHORT: never below 15 minutes. This is the core skill.

53–59 · Does it line up?

• Outcome = Activity = Evidence: the same performance. SAY: put your Session 1 slide and Session 2 activity next to the new outcomes. Does each help learners do the verb? Change what doesn’t.
• WHY: Biggs again, now at session scale (Session 1 was slide scale).
• IF SHORT: halve it; never drop it.

59–67 · Follow-through: a two-way negotiation

• SAY: forgetting is the default. What will your learners revisit at 30, 60 and 90 days, and how (a Kahoot, an email, a team message)?
• ASK: who will hold you to it? And what do you need from them? Write their name, and the support you’ll ask for (time, release, a slot at the team meeting), in the Follow-through box.
• SAY: it’s a negotiation, not a check-up. Your named person (often your manager) can hold you to it if they provide what you need.
• WHY: transfer depends on the work environment as much as the training (Baldwin & Ford 1988; the New World Kirkpatrick “required drivers”). Learners can’t create protected time on their own; the named person removes barriers as well as asking. → spaced practice

67–80 · The reveal → your commitment

Protected. Never cut.

• “You’ve been on a canvas for three weeks.” Then this programme’s own canvas, one box per click: learners · need · outcomes · evidence · activities · follow-through. Point to where they experienced each.
• The Session 1 question, answered: what do we need people to do differently, and how will our teaching make that happen?
• Hand out a clean canvas. SAY: copy yours onto one page, and photograph it. Your named person can hold you to it if they provide the support you need. It’s also portfolio evidence (Portfolio mapping).
• WHY: making the hidden design visible: the programme is the final worked example.

80–86 · One sentence each

• Everyone, aloud: “The one thing I’ll do differently is…”
• WHY: a light public commitment; ends on the individual change, not the event.

86–90 · Feedback → close

• Hand out the paper feedback form (Evaluation Toolkit). SAY: thank you. Your named person will ask; so will we, at 30 and 90 days.
• Share Before You Plan a Teaching Day: the canvas as six questions, for managers and organisers.

After the session

• Nothing to read back next week. The read-back is now each participant’s named person at 30 days, with the support they agreed.
• Level 2: check completed canvases against the short rubric. Are outcomes observable verbs? Does the evidence match the verb?
• Level 3: at 30 and 90 days, send the three questions: What did you change? What happened? What got in the way?
• All forms, the rubric, timings and governance: Evaluation Toolkit. Don’t restate them here.
• Psychological safety, debriefing and feedback are parked for a separate simulation-based session.