Hi,

Can anyone advise on the best/most practical route to go down to gain H&S Teaching qualifications or just teaching qualifications?

As part of every new employees induction programme, I spend a considerable amount of time with them carrying out the Health & Safety aspects of the induction, including interactive training in Manual Handling, Asbestos Awareness, Fire Safety, Electrical Safe Isolation & Legionella Awareness.

However none of our induction training is actually accredited, nor do I have any form of formal teaching qualification. As our industry progresses, more and more of our clients are requesting formal training accreditation for employee inductions.

I have now been instructed by my directors to gain a formal teaching qualification, thus allowing me to impart such information as an accredited person and thus gain formal accreditation for the materials that I currently impart.

Any help or guidance would be greatly appreciated.

I agree with the blue person.
Its a good qualification and widely recognised.

Thanks all for your input, have a much better idea of which road I need to travel down.

I went down 7307 route
did it on evening classes local college
you may have to do train the trainers on some topics once you gain 7307 but the are there just to ensure you have the knowledge on that particular subject

You "don't need" any H&S qualifications to do H&S, which is why H&S in this country is in the mess it is.
In reality, I'd say a teaching qualification was required if you want the credibility as a trainer.

Ray,

I ought to have added "either" at the end of the first line.

I had done 2 previous courses on "train the trainer" and have been delivering training for near 30 years.
Yet it was only after doing training for the teaching qualifications did I realise how little I knew.
True, maybe a few of us are born with the skills.

I have had some pretty shoddy trainers with teaching qualifications and some pretty good ones without. Also of course I have had some very good trainers with qualifications and some pretty poor ones without.

The training provided in gaining training qualifications improves the competency of all those trained, but it does not in itself make a good trainer.

Qualifications do give credibility and also a well earned reputation, and good references from 'customers' give credibility; so of course there different ways to show credibility.

Given the choice I like to see a good trainer who is also qualified but will accept there are good trainers who do not have teaching qualifications. I am always reminded of what my grandparents and parents taught me as I grew up and yet none of them had teaching qualifications. Those lessons have served me very well in life.

Regards

I did the acess to learning course last year and as I expected the course was mainly common sense stuff, which I could apply to my work based training. Of course BEFORE I did the course the stuff they talked about on the course was airy fairy stuff…and not at all related to what I was doing at work (or so I thought).

"Toe" yes I have looked at all of the options available and have recommended to my directors that the City & Guilds/NVQ route is the most sensible, however in saying that I have been a trainer & coach for nearly twenty years in sports and H&S and have never been told that the information I imparted was poor.

I agree, in that it is more about the individual and their ability to impart good quality information in an understandable format, that in the long run will set you out as a good trainer.