Discussion in 'General' started by Pete J, 30 Oct 2013.
Training isn't testing.
Training without testing isn't worth a ****,
I think we can assume when people talk about training, it's understood that training will include some kind of evaluation to check if the person being trained has absorbed the main tenets of the intended syllabus.
Only a moron would think otherwise.
Name calling now? Very mature. So training is only worth something if you have a test at the end of it?
Give 3 examples of quality training that doesn't involve some kind of quality control? ....so we can consider your question properly.
Answering a question with a question?
Just to clarify, is training only useful if there is a test at the end of it?
Are you reading the right thread, did you not understand this post mick? :
So are you to going to give us 3 examples of quality training that doesn't involve some kind of quality control? ....so we can consider your question properly.
Or cant you think of 1 either?
Van drivers aren't too bad here in Liverpool. It's the school run mums and BMW/Audi pricks you have to watch out for, all of them doing 60 in 30 zone and pulling out without checking their mirrors, etc. Bloody dangerous.
Don't try turn this on me. I stated that training isn't testing and you then said that training without testing isn't worth a ****, now I train people for a living (fire systems and alarm panels) and I do not test people at the end of it yet I still get paid.
Now is my training not worth a ****?
Of course by your reckoning I must be a moron because I don't believe you need to be tested?
So you said I was wrong yet you want me to prove I am not????
Prove I am.
What qualifies you to do that job ..& did it involve some kind of testing?
So let me get this right michael, you train people to use fire systems that could potentially cause death if used incorrectly ...& you don't even bother to check they understand what you have told them? ...but you don't care cos you get paid anyway & if it goes on fire you&yours will be elsewhere? ...what kind of monster are you?
I did sit several exams for me to qualify as a trainer .
As for the rest of your statement, where did I say I didn't care? Where did I say I didn't bother to check they understand?
Name calling again?
You still haven't answered the question I asked you though? Is it because you can't justify it?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Let daddy cut it up in managble chunks for ya...
Seems like your main concern is that you get paid...caring doesn't naturally spring to mind when I read that
Think your phone isn't showing you the full thread mick, has been answered & reposted twice now.
If I say something then follow it up with, do you understand what I have just told you? Does that count as a test?
If you believe that is a test then you really must live on a wee bubble.
What make you think my main concern is me getting paid? You are making a lot of assumptions and yet still won't admit you are the one who is wrong. You made a statement that was wrong, I gave you an example as to why it's wrong yet you have the cheek to call me moron? A monster?
And I think I must be missing part of the thread if you have answered me, because nowhere can I see an answer.
It depends how they answer, if they just say "Yes" then No, if they can accurately repeat back to you what you have told them ..then Yes.
Have you tried turning your phone Off then On?
Get back on topic ffs how to kill a thread
If I ask a question I only need a yes or no answer. So do you agree that you can get worthwhile training without needing a test?
No need. You never answered.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We already have a test that makes us courteous and considerate to cyclists.. it's called the driving test. What people do once they've passed is another matter of course.. but that's clearly not a training issue. You can train people until they scream for mercy, but once left to their own devices, they'll do what they want if that's the way they're inclined (if there's no incentive to do otherwise.. or clearly defined punishment).
Most motorists ARE considerate towards cyclists however... stop painting a bleak picture. The sheer volume of cars on the road will inevitably mean that almost every cycle journey will put you in close contact with at least a couple of knobheads... but you shouldn't let it colour your judgement of the hundreds, possibly thousands of other cars that passed you without cause for concern.
You mean like the mandatory CPC training for all bus and lorry drivers where you have to attend a 35 hour course but there's no test at the end of it?
So when these bus and lorry drivers go on these CPC courses ..nobody bothers to check if they have understood what is being taught? ...how very strange!
That's very interesting crazyjoe, thanks for your contribution.
Try resetting back to factory?
Ah, very good.
You giving up? Or are you going to try and redefine what a test is?
Separate names with a comma.