Training to do a job, or training to pass an exam?
Archive - Originally posted on "The Horse's Mouth" - 2012-02-13 08:01:47 - Graham EllisAre 46%, 47%, 48% or 49% of visitors to "UK Online Centres" aged 55 or older? I'm told that the answer is 48%. But what a stupid question to put into a test to see if I know enough to be a "Digital Champion" to help people who are not (yet) online get online. Whatever the answer is, it's not going to make any difference to how I help teach / instruct. In fact, it's a classic example that tests should see if someone's been following a course rather than to assess their suitability to perform a certain role when they have completed the course.
One of the big differences between a commercial course such as the ones we offer at Well House Consultants and a college course is that we train you to do a job, and they train you to pass an exam. Neither is necessarily better than the other - they're different. If you're a company / looking for training "in post" / a contractor with a particular job to do, our approach is probably better. But if you're a student / job seeker looking for credentials to help you get a job and wishing to learn a regulated topic (such as Java, where you can become a "Java Certified Programmer"), then the training to pass an exam is probably the most effective use of your time and money.
P.S. The percentage of visitors aged 55 and more to a "UK Online Centre" may be 48%. Is that figure since the centres opened, or over the last three months or six months? I'll bet the figure changes a little up and down over time, and that at some point every answer that was offered was correct!