What you need is an effective assessment process? People watch  the videos and complete the online exercises but how do you ascertain that they know how to do the job safely and correctly? This is not just an issue with e-learning: on the old days you could send someone to a residential course and they would come back with a shiny certificate and an expenses claim. Did anyone check to see that they had learned what you wanted them to learn and that they had achieved an appropriate level of competency?  

Thanks for all the replys, as mentioned e-learning is only that e-learning - Im not a fan! classroom environment is always best (in my experience). Thanks again. 

This is one of those subjects that will always create a debate. Personally I prefer face to face classroom to get the theory across and then go into the workplace to deliver any practical like manual handling/abrasive wheels/wheel dressing. 

I've used elearning but always followed up with a face to face practical and in both this and face to face training the key has been unscheduled workplace observation afterwards to make sure the skills taught are being used.

I am though lucky to have a captive workforce, in one place and a Leadership Team that views effective Safety Training as essential and doesn't just look at the bottom line cost !

O'Donnell

Very puzzled by your assertion on THIS thread that

Always interesting to hear the views of a group of people who are, mostly, academically qualified on the need for 'practical' training. 

Even more puzzled by what appears to be a thumbs up for e-learning at the end of your posting.

Seems fairly obvious to me that the original poster and respondents have thought about the pragmatic rather than "academically qualified" perspective as to whether e-learning alone could meet the training needs.

Perhaps you could elaborate if you do actually think that the types of training which JHF specifically mentions could be entirely done by e-learning, without e.g. a practical element and/or follow up observation to see how well the training has been assimilated and turned into safe behaviours.

O'Donnell

I am STILL puzzled as to whether your initial response added value.

Since I clearly could not understand your initial response either it lacked clarity or there is something wrong with my comprehensive ability.

I note that I made no comment on this thread until your response confused me.

To resolve this I am going to suggest a comparison of what has been written - similar to a Judge directing that two expert witnesses come up with a Joint Experts' report to set out where the experts agree on the issues, so as to more clearly highlight where they are in DISagreement.

So, do I now correctly interpret your thinking along the following lines:

ME "Seems fairly obvious to me that the original poster and respondents have thought about the pragmatic rather than "academically qualified" perspective as to whether e-learning alone could meet the training needs."

YOU agree that the previour respondents had taken a pragmatic rather than academic approach, so rather rendering your blanket observation somewhat redundant to THIS thread?

ME "Perhaps you could elaborate if you do actually think that the types of training which JHF specifically mentions could be entirely done by e-learning, without e.g. a practical element and/or follow up observation to see how well the training has been assimilated and turned into safe behaviours."

YOU agree that the specific training mentioned by JHF could NOT be delivered entirely by e-learning?

Edited by user 04 July 2023 10:12:08(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Originally Posted by: O'Donnell54548

Sorry Peter, if I had been aware that my post was subject to and evaluation I would have taken more care. My initial point, poorly made obviously, was that a Training Needs Analysist would have identified the level and scope of the training required.

For example: office worker - elearning manual handling awareness course. Warehouse paker - elearning plus practical lesson with evaluation at end. Electrician - City & Guilds approved training and qualification.  

My point, again poorly made, was that if the original poster had carried out said TNA then they would not have to ask the question in the first place.  And to have done so would have been the true 'pragmatic' approach.

Thank youy for your response, always happy to hear other peoples views. He who knows everything, no nothing.

Peter, I have noticed the grammar and spelling mistakes in my post, sorry rushing and on a break.