Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Reading is not training

Expand Messages
  • wahowland@aol.com
    OK, I ll stick my neck out on this one and say that I don t think that the online training is so hot either. On-line isn t training in the same way that
    Message 1 of 5 , Mar 18 6:09 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      OK, I'll stick my neck out on this one and say that I don't think that the
      online "training" is so hot either. On-line isn't training in the same way that
      reading isn't.
      Before you start hittin' the keys, hear me out. I'm not some Luddite; hell,
      anyone who sees me here knows I spend entirely too much time online both
      recreationally and professionally. And I know that today's learners have different
      needs, and the BSA is trying to jump into the modern era by meeting them with
      (among other things) online training for people who are too dam' busy to go to
      an actual class with, y'know, actual people in it. And I know that this thang
      is supposed to be more "interactive" than just passively watching a video
      (although, IMHO, it's a near call). And I know that the interface with Scoutnet
      gives records, at least theoretically.

      But.

      Where on the online "course" do you get to ask questions? Where do you get to
      hear the voices of other peers, meet people, get to know the training
      staffers, have someone pick up your misconceptions and help you straighten them out,
      get the skinny on local laws, get the handout that has all your council
      contact info on it, see the youth videos if you want to borrow them to take home for
      the week, see that great poster that compares all the YP youth training with
      respect to age and stage (don't ask..it was a WB project)..... you get the
      picture.

      I think it's a prime example of something we have the technology to do, but
      that isn't necessarily the right thing to do. Sure, it's more convenient, and
      the theory is that some folks getting some training is better than no folks
      getting any training. But I'm still not convinced that this is an effective way
      to train adults in youth protection, just to get them cards.

      Which brings us full circle. "....isn't training."

      Flameproofies on...and I'm outta this job in three months anyway <G>....
      YiS
      Auntie Beans
      Cape Cod & Islands Council, MA
      Training Chair
      I useta be an eagle, NE-I-188
      and a staffer, NE-I-209, 234
      Nat'l Scout Jambo H&S service, 97, 01, 05


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Herb Dulzo
      I am working on Woodbadge staff development for the first time. Couldn t help but make an overhead with the Dilbert powerpoint poisoning cartoon for my
      Message 2 of 5 , Mar 19 3:03 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        I am working on Woodbadge staff development for the first time. Couldn't
        help but make an overhead with the Dilbert "powerpoint poisoning" cartoon
        for my first presentation.

        Herb Dulzo

        ATTENTION YOUNG ADULTS AND TEENAGERS!!
        If you are tired of being hasseled by unreasonable parents...NOW IS THE TIME
        FOR ACTION! Move out and pay your own way while you still know everything!!
        Going to the Boy Scout National Jamboree in 2005!
      • Michael Brown
        ... that the ... same way that ... You d no luddite. :) I work in the IT field, and so have had various experiences with on- line training. When I worked on
        Message 3 of 5 , Mar 22 10:26 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In scouter_t@yahoogroups.com, wahowland@a... wrote:
          > OK, I'll stick my neck out on this one and say that I don't think
          that the
          > online "training" is so hot either. On-line isn't training in the
          same way that
          > reading isn't.

          You'd no luddite. :)

          I work in the IT field, and so have had various experiences with on-
          line training. When I worked on my second master's degree, most of
          my courses were done on-line and my experiences with them ran the
          gamut of being as good as in-person training to litte better then
          reading a book and sending in assignments. So my only caution is to
          not lump in ALL on-line training as the same.

          The on-line training for YPT is one type, were you read stuff on the
          screen, watch videos, and then do some simple tasks to
          somehow 'prove' you did the training. But there is little or no
          interaction with a trainer to be sure you really understood the
          material (which regardless if you use videos/ppt, is the REAL
          value/power of having a GOOD trainer deliver training). That's why I
          and many of my co-workers dislike this kind of training.

          I have had on-line training in which there was a real
          trainer 'delivering' the training (using PPT type thing) in real
          time, which meant there was a means for interaction with the trainer
          and other participants. These sorts of on-line training was pretty
          good, but it loses the other advantages of on-line training of being
          able to take it when YOU want, rather then taking it at a set time.

          There is nothing wrong with the proper use of PPT/videos. A trainer
          need to know the material and be able to ADD to it from their own
          knowledge and experiences, and be able to re-explain it for the
          audience to be sure they do understand it. This, as I noted, is the
          advantage of having a real trainer give training, rather then watch a
          tape, read a book, etc.

          Michael Brown
        • Dan Kurtenbach
          It is interesting that most of the comments on this thread measure good training not by ojective standards applicable to the trainer (does she speak clearly,
          Message 4 of 5 , Mar 23 1:22 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            It is interesting that most of the comments on this thread measure good
            training not by ojective standards applicable to the trainer (does she speak
            clearly, vary the pace and/or methods of presentation, repeat important
            points, etc.), but by subjective standards applicable to the students (Would
            they want to come back to training? Were they entertained? Did they look
            like they learned something?).

            Nor was the material itself really mentioned. Remember back in the Watergate
            era, when the Nixon tapes were released? Some network -- perhaps it was PBS
            -- televised speakers just reading the transcripts in monotone. Yet the
            content made it interesting (and entertaining). On the other hand, even if
            it was Auntie Beans teaching calculus, I don't think I'd get much out of the
            course because of the content.

            I guess my view of it is that the quality of training has three main
            components. The first is the content, the actual material being presented
            -- is it selected and arranged to meet the goals of the training? Is it too
            much, too little, too complex, too basic? Do the various sections build on
            each other, or are they arranged haphazardly? The second component is the
            presentation -- is the method of presentation (live trainer, video,
            computer, audiotape, reading material) selected to meet the goals of the
            training? Is the method of presentation appropriate for the material?
            Appropriate for the audience? Are the location, time, and facilities
            appropriate for the material and comfortable and convenient for the
            audience? Is the method of presentation audience-friendly? (That is, is
            the live presenter skilled? Is the typeface large enough on the handouts?
            Are the computer directions easy to follow?) The third component is an
            objective measurement of learning -- did the participants actually learn
            what they were supposed to learn? Were the goals of the training met? Have
            they put the training to use? Do they remember what they learned six months
            later? Two years later?

            Dan Kurtenbach
            Fairfax, VA

            _________________________________________________________________
            Get tax tips, tools and access to IRS forms � all in one place at MSN Money!
            http://moneycentral.msn.com/tax/home.asp
          • tsbeb@att.net
            This past weekend I attended a conference and some training. One presenter did read mostly from the syllabus. But he did it in a manner that if you were not
            Message 5 of 5 , Mar 23 2:32 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              This past weekend I attended a conference and some training. One presenter did read mostly from the syllabus. But he did it in a manner that if you were not looking at him, and most of the time you were looking at a power point, you did not know that he was reading.

              It was his first time presenting this leadership workshop. He did a fine job speaking. Actually it was his first time teaching any training program.

              Ted Beblowski
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.