TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:CBT vs. Training - my thoughts From:Ron D Rhodes <Ron_D_Rhodes -at- MAIL -dot- BANKONE -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 17 Mar 1998 10:05:26 -0500
On CBT v. Training
Elissa wrote:
<<<<<<<What are some thoughts out there on Computer Based Training
versus training in the flesh? Are we just fooling ourselves or is CBT
the next wave of effective information transmission?>>>>>
My thoughts,
Stand-up training is always better.
That's my opinion. But I am a realist. Companies are going to "follow
the money," and CBTs are much cheaper than stand-up.
A well-written CBT is effective.
But the operative phrase is "well written." Companies need to
understand that, while a bad trainer can usually communicate a little
knowledge at the very least, a bad CBT doesn't communicate anything at
all.
What is a well-written CBT?
I don't really have the answer to that, sorry. But I know that I have
taken some excellent ones (and some bad ones, too). I am currently
researching what an author must do to write a "good" CBT. If I ever
figure it out, I'll let you know.
Ron Rhodes
PS
I just re-subscribed to this list so I haven't followed any recent
threads. I'll bet lots of great comments already exist on this in the
archives.
