Talk:Train the Trainers consultation

Welcome to the discussion about Train The Trainers. Do you have opinions on the programme? Were you on one of the courses? Were you trained by someone who was? How do you think it can develop? Please let me know so that I can compile a report for the Board and plan the future programme. Jon Davies (WMUK) (talk) 15:51, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Weekends

I was on one of the courses last year and was pretty impressed. One observation though, is it true that we pay a premium to have it run at the weekend? If so, and if we run more than one event a year, you might consider doing one in the week, a lot of the attendees would happily have attended a mid week session especially if it was saving the charity money. Jonathan Cardy (WMUK) (talk) 10:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Accreditation

This word worries me as it implies that you need to go on the course to be an accreditted trainer. This can be an expensive use of resources. As I understand it the course is intended to teach Wikipedians to teach and not to train Teachers about how to teach Wikipedia. We should assume that people who already have a degree level teaching qualification have already been taught to teach. The SWAT analysis overleaf does not mention the accreditation apart from noting it exists. It should be a strength but the course needs to recognise its limitations. If we compare an average accreditted trainer (from the WMUK course) with a WMF person who trains people in the USA and is visiting the country or Tony Santi before I met him at EduWiki (who was teaching Wiki without WMUK guidance) then how many of these are accreditted trainers? I think the correct answer is three. If its "one" then we belittle the training offered here. --176.227.135.245 10:14, 19 June 2013 (UTC)