Re: CBT vs. Training - my thoughts

Subject: Re: CBT vs. Training - my thoughts
From: Scott Gray <scotty -at- CM -dot- MATH -dot- UIUC -dot- EDU>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 12:00:12 -0600

> >
> Although I don't agree with the first assertion (stand-up training is always
> better), I agree even less with the second (it's the worst). It's an obvious
> overgeneralization. Provide some facts to support the idea that nonskilled
> people who learn to use complex production equipment learn better if they
> don't have stand-up training, or even better, that they can learn how to
> perform fine motor activities by watching CBT, then I'll consider it.

The key word you have to be careful with is "watching" CBT. I am not
suggesting that anyone merely "watch" CBT has to be a "participation" to
be effective.

The other thing is that I am not suggesting that people learn without
the help of instructors. I am suggesting that instructors need to change
how they communicate with the student. In every instance where I used
CBT to train students it always means MORE WORK for me. It is much easier
to stand in front of a group of students and lecture than it is to let the
students loose and walk around help them invidually or in groups.

> > Think about something you are good at. Did you learn it all from
> > listening to someone tell you what to do? You probably took their
> > suggestions yes, but then you went off and taught yourself, coming back
> > and getting feedback every once and while from someone. All said and done
> > we teach OURSELVES.
> >
> You're playing semantic games here with the term "teach." You're talking
> about "learning," which can only take place internally. Teaching IS the
> process of giving suggestions, demonstrating, providing feedback, and
> explaining concepts. That all takes place between two points of
> communication, whether it's a CBT and user or an instructor and student.
> Could CBT (at this point in its development) provide spontaneous feedback?
> Learn to change tack when a user doesn't understand? Know by the user's
> nonverbal reactions that he or she is confused and respond in a way that
> helps alleviate the confusion?
> You note that CBT with a facilitator in a lab is the best method of
> training. Isn't this, in abstract, the same as a stand-up training session
> with opportunities for hands-on training? How is the latter "the worst way
> to learn?"
> Not every subject lends itself to CBT. Not all people learn best on
> computers. If we're going to discern the value of CBT, let's be realistic
> about its limitations.
> > Bill Burns
> > Senior Technical Writer/Technology Consultant
> > ILE Communications
> > billdb -at- ile -dot- com
> >

Previous by Author: Re: CBT vs. Training - my thoughts
Next by Author: Re: CBT vs. Training - my thoughts
Previous by Thread: Re: CBT vs. Training - my thoughts
Next by Thread: Re: CBT vs. Training - my thoughts

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads