Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Rachel G
I wonder if anyone can help me, during a recent audit by an external body it was mentioned that as a company all our trainers will need to hold a teaching qualification by 2010.
Can anyone point me in the direction on where this has originated? and where the requirement stops, do we have to qualify all line managers to deliver safety talks?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Paul Oliver
I would go back to your auditors and ask them to clarify this point
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By JAI
Simple
Go back to the audit company and ask were they got the information from
all our managers and supervisors have attended the train the trainer course, However i belive you have to be competent in the subject to teach it, but as usual this course makes them belive they know everything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By David P. Johnson
I believe it originates from legislation that those involved in teaching/training in PUBLIC SERVICES (such as schools, colleges and departments) must hold a teaching qualification by 2010.
If you don't fit this description, you could take it as best practice, but I doubt it would be binding.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By naomi
A teaching qualfication is only needed if you are teaching in further education.
This will not apply to in-house training.
I agree you should be competent in your field of training and ideally hold a proffesional trainers cert.
Hope this helps
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Vincent Hearn
I agree with Naomi, I believe that to teach in FE you will need a level 4 teaching qual eg City & Guilds 7407 complete or a Cert Ed. This requirement is to teach students. It is also a requirement to be competent in the vocational subject matter.
For staff training I don't think the level 4 teaching qualification applies but it makes sense to have some teaching or training qualification.
I am the safety adviser in a college of FE and I am doing the C&G 7302 Certificate in Delivering Learning for the purpose of staff training
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By DANGER RANGER
Vincent
I did a 7307 micro teaching course but have always wondered if this was enough for in-house training as far as teaching skills wee concerned i.e. creation of teaching plans blah blah delivery and feedback.
I think 10 weeks part time was enough but others may differ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Gary IMD(UK)
Sounds like another excuse for some companies to make additional profit!
In my opinion, a good trainer has two essential requirements. 1) The knowledge 2) The ability to impart that knowledge. This is regardless of any qualification. The qualification alone will not make them a competent trainer.
Most trainers have completed a 'Train the Trainer' course, or have studied with the CIPD, however, I know of trainers with qualifications coming out of their **** but still cannot get their message across in an understandable way! (By the same token, I also know of trainers who are fantastic at their job yet have no qualifications whatsoever)!
It's the age old situation; Someone is good at their job so they become a Manager... and fall flat on their face. Why? Because they haven't perhaps been trained to man-manage, etc. To become a Doctor, Solicitor, Lawyer etc. you have to be 'trained', yet the poor 'newly promoted Manager' often doesn't get this training. How many Trainers do you know that were given their job 'because they were good at their existing job'? Doesn't mean they will be able to impart that knowledge does it?!
My opinion is that trainers should be trained (as should everyone) be it formally or informally, about Learning styles, presentation, course structure, etc. That way training because fun, enjoyable, tailor-made, meets delegates objectives and as a result of this, delegates actually go away with a new-found knowledge, skill or attitude.
Nothing gives me greater pleasure than when I review my H & S courses and the feedback is 'Brilliant day', 'Learnt loads', 'Didn't realise H & S was so interesting and relevant to what I do'! And yes, I'm serious; but then I do develop and deliver exceptionally good courses!
Arrogant? Moi?! No, just positive and confident that I do make a difference.
Take care.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kieran J Duignan
Rachel
You wrote:
'I wonder if anyone can help me, during a recent audit by an external body it was mentioned that as a company all our trainers will need to hold a teaching qualification by 2010.
Can anyone point me in the direction on where this has originated? and where the requirement stops, do we have to qualify all line managers to deliver safety talks?'
May I respectfully point you in the direction of the statement by the Chief Executive of your own company on the website of your own company, which states at 8.34 a.m. on 25 May 2006:
'Provide appropriate resources and training to employees at all levels as required'.
A competent audit is carried out to a standard. The Chief Executive of your own company has declared this standard. Ask him to what extent he believes the guidance of the audit for which he shares responsibility for commissioning is aligned to the standard he has published on your company's website.
If it appears from his reply (or the absence of a reply) that he doesn't, you are free to ask your company's Audit Committee to ensure that the Chief Executive publishes only what he means on your website, in accordance with your company's Code of Conduct also proclaimed on your website.
The clause on Retaliation in your company's Code of Conduct safeguards you in the event of a report regarding a possible contravention of the Code by your Chief Executive or your auditor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Rachel G
Kieran
Many thanks for the response and the research into my company, may I please highlight that this was not an official finding of the audit, mearly a comment made which I have since tried to find some understanding as to it's origin and potential influence on industry. From which point I would make an informed recommendation.
I can confirm that, in line with the statements made by the comany I work for, they do invest in training and the provision of required resource.
Rachel
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Lorna Morris
I only train in-house but decided that I wanted the theory to go with 16 years of practice. I'm doing the PGCE & it's tough cos it was designed for college lecturers but, in my opinion, it has been worth all the hard work and occasional tears. Even learning about 'little' things like lesson plans has meant that my training is better planned & better assessed. I would recommend getting a qualification.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Kieran
I think you were being a little harsh - The committment is to training as required. It does not say we will do anything and everything somebody may suggest as a good idea.
This appears to me as an auditor who has heard something on the news somewhere and has tossed a ball into the air to see if the company has actually thought through the needs and could justify their current stance on trainer training.
The issues begin to be complex where the training is provided as a form of education through colleges and the like.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By 9-Ship
I've just about finished C&G 7302 Delivering Adult learning - this is the earlier course to 7307.
According to my lecturer, 7302 will be the absolute minimum qualification for teaching in colleges etc, by about 2009/10 - can't remember the exact date.
I think the education types are going to push for C&G 7302 as a minimum for ALL adult teachers - however if that ever comes to be is another question.
7302 is 17 weeks/3hrs week - its not too difficult and fairly common sense - it has cost me £120, worth the investment for another 'tick' in the qualifications box on the CV - all helps with the job applications etc.
Not sure about doing 7307 & PGCE, as it seems a bit overboard for in house industrial training, if you are not going to be training full time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Aidan Toner
Not presently convenient to my reference source so i cannot be precise -BUT my understanding is that this 'teaching qualification requirement' will relate to employer organisations which currently attract, or hope to attract, public funding for their training schemes.No teacher training qualifications NO funding!
In other words, competency dictated by autitors as opposed to H/S related bodies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.