I am talking about my training methods. I regularly meet other trainers who say they are also using interactive, coaching- and facilitation-based, participant-led, experiential training methods, and then I read an article on trainingzone that suggests these methods are new and revolutionary and all made up by this professor bloke.
I just can't believe that after all this time there are only a few of us in the world doing this stuff? Surely everyone has realised by now that chalk 'n' talk is a waste of time effort and money?
- I train interpersonal skills by creating repeated learning loops based on practical experiences reflected upon and learned from.
- I teach finance by cracking open their real documents and coaching them through how to question and make decisions guided by the data.
- I teach coaching skills by getting participants to coach each other in how they are going to use coaching skills with their own teams back in work.
- I train trainers to be better trainers by making them train other trainers. That's what Development Days are all about, and participants constantly rave about the experience.
It's really really sad to me that any of this stuff is still being described as "revolutionary". Or is it the influence of accrediting and awarding bodies and formulaic Train The Trainer courses in the training "industry" that keeps Chalk 'n' Talk so prevalent?
Hm.
Dave
Stumble It!