Nick Kemp

I posted this in a reply to another thread, but as its among the most
common misconceptions found on this ng, I'm posting it in a new thread!

I have noticed that there are increasingly over generalised statements
on this and other ngs that are usually unchecked for a number of
reasons. This reply was to a poster who posted the following

"Richard is great at what he does but he is guilty of the same crap he
accuses others of doing when it comes to watering down the field. When
you have seminars with 400+ people all whom get a Trainers certificate,

how does one maintain quality control?"





To my knowledge there have never been 400+ people on any RB trainer
trainings (either in the UK or USA) and certainly in all those
trainings I have attended (or heard about from other people in the last

10 years) were where individuals were given a variety of certificates
depending on previous certifications and demonstrated ability during
the 9 day trainer training.


Also its worth remembering that delegates on completing the trainer
training still only recieve a provisional license, which is only
exchanged for a full license dependant upon supplying additional
material and demonstrating capability.


Regards


Nick Kemp
www.tranceformingnlp.com

PS At tranceforming NLP we only work with certificated training groups
of up to 25 delegates and yes if someone does not demonstrate the
necessary skills and understanding they are not certificated. Otherwise
the certificate effectively becomes one of attendance rather than an
assessment of capability. I have added an mp3 on how to choose an nlp
training at www.nlpmp3.com.

Tom Vizzini

"Nick Kemp" <nickkemp2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1123064927.471664.61460@z14g2000cwz.googlegro ups.com...
> I posted this in a reply to another thread, but as its among the most
> common misconceptions found on this ng, I'm posting it in a new thread!
>
> I have noticed that there are increasingly over generalised statements
> on this and other ngs that are usually unchecked for a number of
> reasons. This reply was to a poster who posted the following

Hi Nick,

There are no misconceptions about the trainings.


>
> "Richard is great at what he does but he is guilty of the same crap he
> accuses others of doing when it comes to watering down the field. When
> you have seminars with 400+ people all whom get a Trainers certificate,
>
> how does one maintain quality control?"

>
> To my knowledge there have never been 400+ people on any RB trainer
> trainings (either in the UK or USA) and certainly in all those
> trainings I have attended (or heard about from other people in the last
> 10 years) were where individuals were given a variety of certificates
> depending on previous certifications and demonstrated ability during
> the 9 day trainer training.

The point is that there have been over 400 people at practitioner trainings.
I am sure trainer trainings are smaller but by how much? I think the ones
from a few years ago topped 100 in LA.

>
> Also its worth remembering that delegates on completing the trainer
> training still only recieve a provisional license, which is only
> exchanged for a full license dependant upon supplying additional
> material and demonstrating capability.

Yes but that provisional license does not stop them from presenting
themselves as a full qualified NLP trainer. Also I have never met anyone who
failed a trainer training. I have seen MANY people who should have failed.

This all ducks one significant fact. The training system is flawed. If the
check clears the trainers is certified. All that does is devalue what a
trainers certificate is worth in the open marketplace.

So the aspiring student has no assurance of a quality training. The
assurance of quality is what the consumer wants. That is why whether I go
into a Mcdonalds around the corner from my house or to the one in Venice
Italy, I know what I am going to get and at what quality.

Bandler has lowered the standard so much that there is no assurance of
quality.

There is much evidence to the contrary. Sloppy trainers with little actual
knowledge.

Example: There is one trainer who occasionally posts here who had no NLP
experience at all. He went to a 3 week Bandler training and was certified as
a trainer. Without ever seeing a client he began teaching NLP and certifying
practitioners just a few months after his training.

With ZERO experience he began training others.

With all due respect Nick. There is no misundertsanding about standards.

I am sure you do a better job but since there are no actual standards even
your certificate of trainer becomes questionable. My point is that a
trainers certificate should guarantee a level of competence and knowledge.
At this point it does not.

Tom

www.essential-skills.com

terrancejack@yahoo.com

Tom Vizzini wrote:
>
> Example: There is one trainer who occasionally posts here who had no NLP
> experience at all. He went to a 3 week Bandler training and was certified as
> a trainer. Without ever seeing a client he began teaching NLP and certifying
> practitioners just a few months after his training.
>
> With ZERO experience he began training others.
>


This is really sad. I am not picking on Richard's trainings only. I
have also met some people from Tad James' group who also were trainers
(spending total of $10,000 for their trainings) who had very little
practical skills and could do more than read from the manual at their
own trainings. I thought Horton's NFNLP folks were the ones being
cheated out of learning NLP but as of late I think they are getting the
better deal: $800 for a Prac training that is only 4-5 days long. They
might not know much but at least they haven't had to take out a second
loan on their house for NLP training.

Tom,
If someone did want to become an NLP Trainer whom would you recommend
to train under (if anyone)? Thanks.

Nick Kemp

My clarification was specifically to address the previous post which
IMO was misleading.

I have seen a whole host of trainers and master trainers over the years
and my observations are that standards are at best variable across all
schools of training, regardless of the duration of the training. I have
also seen and heard about a number people in trainer trainings within
the last 12 months who have had cheques clear and who have not been
given even provisional certificates, for a number of reasons including
lack of competance and knowledge!
There are in my experience many misconceptions about trainings and many
posts on various ngs from people who have never attended the trainings
that they are posting about! One of the reasons for setting up
www.nlpmp3.com was to host a range of interviews from all kinds of
trainers in NLP and who have influenced NLP, representing a range of
views for people to listen to!

I am in agreement with you that certificates frequently do not
represent levels of capability, which is why we adopt the attitude of
only certifying those who demonstrate competence and why we work with
groups of no more that 25.

As you would say

Have fun!

lol

Nick
www.tranceformingnlp.com
www.nlpmp3.com

Venus

Tom,

How do *YOU* know that this trainer had "zero" experience before he
began training others?

Maybe Richard knows something about him that you don't?

Or is it that you're jealous because this guy learned NLP well enough
to teach it much more quickly than you did?

Or take me, for instance, (or others like me). I have not been
officially certified by anyone to do NLP and up till now (at least)
that's the way I've wanted it. However, I KNOW FOR A FACT that I am
more more qualified as a practitioner, a master practitioner and even
as a trainer than most NLPers I've met at this point.

Don't get me wrong. I also know there are a number of people out there
who are better at this than I am, but I know I am BETTER THAN MOST.

The way I decide who's good and who's not is not based on what they (or
others) say about them, but on the RESULTS that they GET.

Get it?

Good.

Venus

Tom Vizzini

"Nick Kemp" <nickkemp2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1123077604.774983.272430@g44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...

> I am in agreement with you that certificates frequently do not
> represent levels of capability, which is why we adopt the attitude of
> only certifying those who demonstrate competence and why we work with
> groups of no more that 25.

This is a very admirable stance to take. I am very personally glad to hear
it. I know it will make a huge difference in the credibility of your
students

Have fun

Tom
www.essential-skills.com


>
> As you would say
>
> Have fun!
>
> lol
>
> Nick
> www.tranceformingnlp.com
> www.nlpmp3.com
>

Tom Vizzini

"Venus" <veenuski@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1123077622.378388.43500@g14g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> Tom,
>
> How do *YOU* know that this trainer had "zero" experience before he
> began training others?

Training ended in July. Ad was placed for training in August. I know the
trainer.

>
> Maybe Richard knows something about him that you don't?

Maybe the moon is made of cheese. The fact is that this guy ended up never
paying Richard to certify and fraudulently gave trainings representing that
he could certify people through Richard.

>
> Or is it that you're jealous because this guy learned NLP well enough
> to teach it much more quickly than you did?

Come on Phil.....get you head out of the sand. You know better.

>
> Or take me, for instance, (or others like me). I have not been
> officially certified by anyone to do NLP and up till now (at least)
> that's the way I've wanted it. However, I KNOW FOR A FACT that I am
> more more qualified as a practitioner, a master practitioner and even
> as a trainer than most NLPers I've met at this point.

That is fine as long as the people who come to you know you are an
'uncertified' trainer. If they know that then they have their eyes open
going in. I know you know more than most trainers. Uncertified does not mean
unqualified.

My point is that certified SHOULD mean qualified. There should be no doubt.
At this point it does not.

>
> Don't get me wrong. I also know there are a number of people out there
> who are better at this than I am, but I know I am BETTER THAN MOST.

I agree. I think you kick ass. I like the way you think. I love your books.

>
> The way I decide who's good and who's not is not based on what they (or
> others) say about them, but on the RESULTS that they GET.

I agree 100%

Take car Phil

Tom

www.essential-skills.com

Tom Vizzini

<terrancejack@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1123077146.594257.100220@g44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...

> This is really sad. I am not picking on Richard's trainings only. I
> have also met some people from Tad James' group who also were trainers
> (spending total of $10,000 for their trainings) who had very little
> practical skills and could do more than read from the manual at their
> own trainings.

This is my experience with Tad's trainers as well. I would not recommend
him.


I thought Horton's NFNLP folks were the ones being
> cheated out of learning NLP but as of late I think they are getting the
> better deal: $800 for a Prac training that is only 4-5 days long. They
> might not know much but at least they haven't had to take out a second
> loan on their house for NLP training.

I agree. I would much rather be screwed out of 800 dollars than 10,000

>
> Tom,
> If someone did want to become an NLP Trainer whom would you recommend
> to train under (if anyone)? Thanks.

My ONLY recommendation for getting trainer training is Robert Dilts.

My question would be why anyone would want to be one?

Have fun

Tom

www.essential-skills.com


>

Basher

What makes you an expert than?
AFAIK you published a very good trance cd and then a bunch of mediocre
ones.
AFAIK you have never run a nlp practitioner course.
When I attended my prac at MckennaBreen and you were assisting, I asked
you a question and you tried to sell me one of your courses. What kind
of ethics is that?
MckennaBreen is a fantastic training and you should be ashamed to
rubbish them!!!!

Bashir

Nick Kemp

The original McKenna Breen events circa late 1990's were IMO excellent!
I'm not sure from your post if you are referring to me in person or
not, but I have not assisted on any London events for a number of years
and at the time was not running NLP events myself anyway, so I will
assume you are referring to somebody else! I'm not sure who you are
also referrng to when you suggest someone is rubbishing those events.

The original post on this thread was about the danger of over
generalisations of course, which occur increasingly on this and other
newsgroups!
My training institute which is of course sanctioned by RB runs both
Practitioner and Master Prac events and we of course ran a Master Prac
earlier this year which received excellent feedback, and there are NLP
Pracs run every year with current 2005/2006 dates online at
www.tranceformingnlp.com
At www.nlpmp3.com I mentioned in the "How to choose a training" mp3
that each person should really make up their own minds about what suits
them and keep a open enough mind, asking questions about the format of
the event, numbers present, style of trainers and ideally speak to the
presenters ahead of time.

I assisted on many certificated events up until 2003 and purely by
comparism (in my opinion) there were some excellent ones and some that
for a variety of reasons I would not consider to be as good, but that's
a personal view.

IMO its for each person to check out a whole range of trainers, which
is exactly the same point made by many of those who have done
interviews on NLPmp3!
After all one man's mediocrity can often be another person's idea of
excellence!

Be Well

Nick Kemp
www.nlpmp3.com

DCH

Nice try people.

Now wake up! Wake Up! Get your eyes open all the way open up! Take a deep
breath. Stretch! Stretch!

Good.

You are ready to read the rest of this post. Only if you are fully awake, if
not go back to NOW WAKE UP! and repeat several times. I am seriuos about
this.

The following words may cause physical responses in your "subtle body" which
follows and forms your physical memory when you change positions. (tau pi -
mind body exercise review 1)
The STACK is never dumped completely and residual effects concentrate upon
"like energies".

The problem here, in this thread is that a responses are being offered that
do not match the context of the question. This leaves a vacuum of sorts.

May the "force" be with you.






"Nick Kemp" <nickkemp2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1123064927.471664.61460@z14g2000cwz.googlegro ups.com...
>I posted this in a reply to another thread, but as its among the most
> common misconceptions found on this ng, I'm posting it in a new thread!
>
> I have noticed that there are increasingly over generalised statements
> on this and other ngs that are usually unchecked for a number of
> reasons. This reply was to a poster who posted the following
>
> "Richard is great at what he does but he is guilty of the same crap he
> accuses others of doing when it comes to watering down the field. When
> you have seminars with 400+ people all whom get a Trainers certificate,
>
> how does one maintain quality control?"
>
>
>
>
>
> To my knowledge there have never been 400+ people on any RB trainer
> trainings (either in the UK or USA) and certainly in all those
> trainings I have attended (or heard about from other people in the last
>
> 10 years) were where individuals were given a variety of certificates
> depending on previous certifications and demonstrated ability during
> the 9 day trainer training.
>
>
> Also its worth remembering that delegates on completing the trainer
> training still only recieve a provisional license, which is only
> exchanged for a full license dependant upon supplying additional
> material and demonstrating capability.
>
>
> Regards
>
>
> Nick Kemp
> www.tranceformingnlp.com
>
> PS At tranceforming NLP we only work with certificated training groups
> of up to 25 delegates and yes if someone does not demonstrate the
> necessary skills and understanding they are not certificated. Otherwise
> the certificate effectively becomes one of attendance rather than an
> assessment of capability. I have added an mp3 on how to choose an nlp
> training at www.nlpmp3.com.
>

futureritual

93


Tom Vizzini wrote:
> "Venus" <veenuski@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > Or is it that you're jealous because this guy learned NLP well enough
> > to teach it much more quickly than you did?
>
> Come on Phil.....get you head out of the sand. You know better.
>


Huh? How did I get involved in this discussion? That wasn't my post.


93 93/03
Phil
http://hawkridgeproductions.com/

Tom Vizzini

"futureritual" <primordial_stu@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1123352216.624698.37920@g43g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> 93
>
>
> Tom Vizzini wrote:
> > "Venus" <veenuski@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > Or is it that you're jealous because this guy learned NLP well enough
> > > to teach it much more quickly than you did?
> >
> > Come on Phil.....get you head out of the sand. You know better.
> >
>
>
> Huh? How did I get involved in this discussion? That wasn't my post.


My apologies Phill. I misread the post...Oops

Tom

www.essential-skills.com

Steve Boyley

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:arqdnVFgeJXfcW3fRVn-vQ@adelphia.com...
>
> "Nick Kemp" <nickkemp2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1123077604.774983.272430@g44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>
>> I am in agreement with you that certificates frequently do not
>> represent levels of capability, which is why we adopt the attitude of
>> only certifying those who demonstrate competence and why we work with
>> groups of no more that 25.
>
> This is a very admirable stance to take. I am very personally glad to hear
> it. I know it will make a huge difference in the credibility of your
> students


Hi Tom, Nick & other NLP enthusiasts. I havent read here in months, glad to
see lots of discussion happening.

I was in one of those Trainer Training events in LA during the late 90's.
There were about 100 people there and only 9 of us recieved Provsional
Trainer of NLP. Of those 9, the only one I can name that is now running a
successfull NLP seminars company, is me! After promoting and doing 17 NLP
Master/Prac events in the last 6 1/2 years; I can say that it's one thing to
know how to instruct others, its quite another to make a successful business
of it.

I follow the same philosophy as Nick: Provide quality trining (using NLP to
teach NLP) with personal attention to each student by keeping the event
limmited to between 20 and 25 people. Certification is based upon observable
skills not intelectual knowledge, nor what previous training they have
attended. So far I have only failed to certify one student in 17 events, I
refunded that student's full payment. I say I failed because that's how I
vew it, as my failure not the students.

I concure with opinions expressed about the results of various trainers.
Many of my students came to me after attending events other trainers put on.
Tad James students are a tad lacking in observable demonstration of NLP
skills, even after trainer certification, however there is a tremendous
demonstration of inteletual knowledge (terminology etc.). Tony Robins
students are slightly better at demonstrating NLP skills and have little
terminology, they do have a collection of strategies for this and that
though. Students of Ross Jeffries and Tom Vizzini have more NLP skills than
those of either afforementiond trainers, plus they have some effective
strategies for this AND that. McKenna w/ Bandler or LaValle, and
Bandler-LaValle Persuasion Eng or DHE produces students that demonstrate
more skills than they themselves are aware of, an indication of good
installation w/ low concious awareness. Bandler-LaValle students USUALLY
demonstrate at what I consider a nice ballance between akills and concious
awarness of their capabilities. That is the limit of my experience of more
than 2 instances (damn, revealing more of my metaprograms) so I do not have
an oppinion about other trainers.

Maybe I was lucky, before I started training NLP I had over a decade of
experience using NLP in sales and business as well as a couple of years
using NLP for "theraputic interventions" or "hypnotherapy". I also know how
to run businesses that alow me to live the lifestyle I want and there are
easier businesses to run than an NLP Training Institute. Many who recieve
NLP Trainer certification through any organization, do not poses or acquire
the business savy to make it happen. This eliminates most but the
"intelectual" crowd in my opinion. The "intelectual crowd" often have or
aquire the business acumen than results in an accademic recycling of the
knowledge rather than the skills.

To sum up, the "behavioral compency crowd" uses natural selction of market
ecconomics and the "Intelectual compancy crowd" uses testable knowledge
while missing integration of the skills. There are many excelent as well as
many shitty NLP trainers out there who cannot put together seminars on a
regular basis, there are a few excelent as well as a few shitty trainers who
do. Buyer beware, check out the trainers reputation and choose wisely.

Enjoy,

Steve Boyley

Get Ahead, Fast Lane Your Brain, Open Your Mind To How People Think.
Affordable International NLP Training Seminars
http://www.nlpmind.com/nlp-practitioner.htm

C2005 Boyley - content may not be reproduced in any form outside this
specific newsgroup.



> Have fun
>
> Tom
> www.essential-skills.com
>
>
>>
>> As you would say
>>
>> Have fun!
>>
>> lol
>>
>> Nick
>> www.tranceformingnlp.com
>> www.nlpmp3.com
>>
>
>

Steve Boyley

< Previous post was a draft >

"Tom Vizzini" <Tom@essential-skills.com> wrote in message
news:arqdnVFgeJXfcW3fRVn-vQ@adelphia.com...
>
> "Nick Kemp" <nickkemp2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1123077604.774983.272430@g44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>
>> I am in agreement with you that certificates frequently do not
>> represent levels of capability, which is why we adopt the attitude of
>> only certifying those who demonstrate competence and why we work with
>> groups of no more that 25.
>
> This is a very admirable stance to take. I am very personally glad to hear
> it. I know it will make a huge difference in the credibility of your
> students

Hi Tom, Nick & other NLP enthusiasts. I haven't read here in months, glad to
see lots of discussion happening.

I was in one of those Trainer Training events in LA during the late 90's.
There were about 100 people there and only 9 of us received Provisional
Trainer of NLP. Of those 9, the only one I can name that is now running a
successful NLP seminars company, is me! After promoting and doing 17 NLP
Master/Prac events in the last 6 1/2 years; I can say that it's one thing to
know how to instruct others, its quite another to make a successful business
of it.

I follow the same philosophy as Nick: Provide quality training (using NLP to
teach NLP) with personal attention to each student by keeping the event
limited to between 20 and 25 people. Certification is based upon observable
skills not intellectual knowledge, nor what previous training they have
attended. So far I have only failed to certify one student in 17 events, I
refunded that student's full payment. I say I failed because that's how I
view it, as my failure not the students.

I concur with opinions expressed about the results of various trainers. Many
of my students came to me after attending events other trainers put on. Tad
James students are a tad lacking in observable demonstration of NLP skills,
even after trainer certification, however there is a tremendous
demonstration of intellectual knowledge (terminology etc.). Tony Robins
students are slightly better at demonstrating NLP skills and have little
terminology, they do have a collection of strategies for this and that
though. Students of Ross Jeffries and Tom Vizzini have more NLP skills than
those of either aforementioned trainers, plus they have some effective
strategies for this AND that. McKenna w/ Bandler or LaValle, and
Bandler-LaValle Persuasion Eng or DHE produces students that demonstrate
more skills than they themselves are aware of, an indication of good
installation w/ low conscious awareness. Bandler-LaValle students USUALLY
demonstrate at what I consider a nice balance between skills and conscious
awareness of their capabilities. That is the limit of my experience of more
than 2 instances (damn, revealing more of my metaprograms) so I do not have
an opinion about other trainers.

Maybe I was lucky, before I started training NLP I had over a decade of
experience using NLP in sales and business as well as a couple of years
using NLP for "therapeutic interventions" or "hypnotherapy". I also know how
to run businesses that allow me to live the lifestyle I want and there are
easier businesses to run than an NLP Training Institute. Many who receive
NLP Trainer certification through any organization, do not poses or acquire
the business savvy to make it happen. This eliminates most but the
"intellectual" crowd in my opinion. The "intellectual crowd" often have or
acquire the business acumen than results in an academic recycling of the
knowledge rather than the skills.

To sum up, the "behavioral competency crowd" uses natural selection of
market economics and the "Intellectual competency crowd" uses testable
knowledge while missing integration of the skills. There are many excellent
as well as many shitty NLP trainers out there who cannot put together
seminars on a regular basis, there are a few excellent as well as a few
shitty trainers who do. Buyer beware, check out the trainers reputation and
choose wisely.

Enjoy,

Steve Boyley

Get Ahead, Fast Lane Your Brain, Open Your Mind To How People Think.

Affordable International NLP Training Seminars
http://www.nlpmind.com/nlp-practitioner.htm

C2005 Boyley - content may not be reproduced in any form outside this
specific newsgroup.


> Have fun
>
> Tom
> www.essential-skills.com
>
>
>>
>> As you would say
>>
>> Have fun!
>>
>> lol
>>
>> Nick
>> www.tranceformingnlp.com
>> www.nlpmp3.com
>>
>
>

Nic

It's interesting to compare the requirements for becoming an NLP trainer
(or for that matter a trainer in a lot of personal development fields)
with those of an accredited trainer in industry.

I run a Certificate in Training Practice course for a local college.
Students have to attend 36 weeks of lectures, 3 hours each. They have to
do the same amount of self directed learning; complete 5 assignments;
deliver one formal training session. Their work is marked/verified by 3
different people.

They only get the chance to repeat one assignment if they fail it - a
subsequent failure and they fail the course. The qualification is
recognised nationally and internationally. It can be followed by a
Diploma and then a Masters Degree.

We will not work with more than a 15:1 ratio of students to trainer as
it's impossible to give ongoing individual feedback with a larger group.

Total cost? Less than £700.

Contrast this with the huge fees charged by many NLP and other companies
for a training qualification of limited worth, frequently only
recognised by the company awarding it or by a small group of largely
self-appointed individuals.

Many trainers that I have seen in the NLP/Personal development fields,
either having attended their course or watched videos, would fail the
practical assessment part of our college course. They are not competent
trainers.

There was talk some time ago that anyone, in any field, wishing to call
themselves a trainer, instructor etc in the UK would have to meet this
standard, or similar. It was a good idea, but has fallen by the wayside.
However, I note that a number of insurance companies will only give
professional indemnity/third part liability assurance to people who
possess the qualification mentioned above, or something similar (IE
Teacher's Certificate). Perhaps that offers a potential credibility
check for students - ask what training qualifications your 'trainer' has
and who has insured them.

Nic

> After all one man's mediocrity can often be another person's idea of
> excellence!
>


It all depends upon how you define mediocrity - in this instance, I
would define it as being unable to meet the knowledge, skills and
behavioural requirements of a professional body that accredits trainers
- in the UK, CIPD, City and Guilds etc. I fail to see how in that
context, the opinion voiced in your quote above is sustainable.

Nick Kemp

As someone who has worked in recruitment and with Human Resources for
over two decades and who currently has a number of university lecturers
as NLP students, I wouldn't agree that the CIPD or City and Guilds in
anyway would guarantee any degree of excellence! I'm also currently
involved in providing training for a number of qualified teachers
through the Meta Education project and IMO having a teaching
qualification does not necessarily guarantee capability! There are some
excellent teachers who are congruent in their communications and there
are many who are less than congruent, who also have a tendancy to have
very fixed views and view learning as a very disassociated process!


When you suggest
"We will not work with more than a 15:1 ratio of students to trainer as

it's impossible to give ongoing individual feedback with a larger
group"

that is of course *your experience* and of course wouldn't necessarily
apply all other trainers, would it?

Regards

Nick Kemp
www.nickkemp.com

Nic

>
> that is of course *your experience* and of course wouldn't necessarily
> apply all other trainers, would it?

How would you give ongoing, regular (ie twice a month) detailed feedback
based on specific observed behaviour to a group larger than 15 with only
one trainer all within the time constraints of a 3 hour session?

Your point about City and Guilds etc reflects the fact that no matter
the standards set, the quality of output depends upon the quality of the
learning experience plus the quality of the assessors.


Regards

Nic