I agree with Penny. My experience as a trainer in people's homes over the last seven years is that 3 hours has become about the right amount of time for a lot of people (it varies of course) if you pitch it right and the client is ready to learn.
 
Years ago it might have taken longer because the software was more (predictably) unpredictable and so for instance Dragon might take hours to get going. The bugs (in my opinion) in TextHelp had been slowly ironed out and it had reached a stage in version 7 / 7.x where it was stable (in my opinion). The newer version 8 / 8.1, which I understand was recoded from scratch (to be vista ready) does seem to me to have some issues again (in my opinion) and I feed them back to TextHelp / suppliers when I find them.
 
Shorter sessions are too short and run over because if you successfully engage the client they actively want to know more and they naturally start to have their own thoughts on what they want to do. By that I mean if you don't know what something does, you don't know what you want from it or what you can do with it. When people are empowered to learn then they can lead more in the training because they know their strengths and weaknesses and they go off in their own direction and the trainer can then follow more than guide in a supportive appropriate way - which I find works motivationally and practically.
 
I tell all my clients that they can ring me anytime or email if it is a ¨non-emergency¨. I get very few calls and when people do call they often solve their own perceived problems over the phone as I just listen. Just the knowledge that they can ring, I think, reassures them. Some clients I see over a matter or months or even years.   
 
I think good trainers need to be far more involved with the system as they are out there, listening and experiencing the difficulties with students, and hopefully sorting them out. I have to do a lot of sorting out it seems and I do this for the individual student to help them. (not my job - but I do it anyway because I have the skills and knowledge and I care - and unpaid too) I haven't had enough time in the past to sort things out for students and then address what I see as systematic failures as well. I don't really have the time now but I am trying to open a dialogue about this and discuss it openly.

I hope that I haven't written anything unreasonable and if I have I apologise. These are just my views.
 
Thanks,
 
Alex
 
Alex Larg
07931 561 877 or 07916 175 077
[log in to unmask]
Freelance Assistive Technology Trainer
Freelance study needs assessor
Former Disability Officer
 

---

> Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2007 11:08:19 +0100
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: training
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Dear Clare,
>
> From experience, this does vary with the trainer and with the student.
>
> A 3-hour session is a fairly workable one in most cases. When students have asked for shorter periods, these have been arranged but it is rare that they actually keep to it when they see how they feel within the session.
>
> What is valuable, is an extension of the training over a few weeks. It is rare for students to have their training sessions grouped together within a few days. The continuity over a period, which includes telephone access to a trainer is particularly valuable, as it tends to support a 'steady approach' to the computer system. In this way, there are less likely to be panic actions that then produce what appear to be technical faults in the computer.
>
> Regards,
>
> Penny
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. on behalf of Davies Clare
> Sent: Mon 02/04/2007 10:52
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: training
>
>
>
> I realise that this was just given as an example, but I doubt that many
> dyslexic students can make effective use of a four-hour training
> session! In many cases 2 hour sessions seem to be around the limit of
> their concentration span, with time to practice what they have learnt
> between sessions - this ties in with the 'learning cycle'. The trainer
> should be fairly local if this sort of pattern of training is provided
> in the student's home.
>
> Clare Davies
> Student Services
> The University of Northampton
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Maiden, Arnold
> Sent: 28 March 2007 14:44
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: training
>
> Sorry I wasn't able to respond to this earlier
>
> We provide student contact details to suppliers (equipment, training,
> tuition, etc) once reports are approved.
>
> Not sure how practical the list of suppliers (equipment, trainers, etc)
> idea would work, quite a few immediate difficulties come to mind (not
> least geography), cost variance to cost approved by LA, with training
> how would you have an informed choice if you have had (say) two 4 hour
> sessions approved. You don't like the trainer for the first so do you
> then ask for approval for another session.
>
> Isn't it the role of the assessor to make an informed choice and
> recommendation to the student and LA?
>
> Arnold Maiden
> Assessor & Assistive Technology Advisor
> Leeds Metropolitan University
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
>
> > Arnold (and all),
> >
> > It seems to me that - during - the study needs assessment the students
> > are
> > in receipt of funding for the assessment bill only - and this
> assessment
> > is
> > compulsory i.e. they have to spend 400 pounds plus of their DSA on it
> -
> > but
> > further to that it is in the gift of the LEA as to what is approved
> (or
> > not)
> > from the recommendations.
> >
> > I once recommend a laser printer/scanner for a 1st year student with
> M.E.
> > and the LEA officer changed the device I had recommended for a cheaper
> > one
> > because the LEA officer thought it was somehow better. Maybe it was,
> but
> > why
> > am I writing reports, listening to students, making a professional
> > judgement, listening to students - (whoops did I repeat myself - sorry
> -
> > going loopy here...) only for the student to be told what you have
> been
> > recommended is not what you are getting? It is potentially confusing
> for
> > the
> > student, extra work for the LEA officer, extra work for the supplier
> as
> > they
> > are contacted by the LEA officer etc.
> >
> > As an aside, why do LEAs request 2 or 3 quotes from what is now
> > supposedly a
> > closed list of DSA-QAG approved (or pending) suppliers? Is it so that
> > they
> > can choose the cheapest quote or what actually is the rationale? Isn't
> > QAG
> > auditing companies, after the companies have paid a proportion of
> their
> > turnover - whether or not their turnover comes from DSA, to check
> their
> > supply quality and presumably their prices - or does price not come
> into
> > quality? Priceless...
> >
> > Also how can the various suppliers you refer to Arnold - AT Trainer,
> > Dyslexia Support Tutor, Equipment Supplier/s, etc. contact the student
> > (rather than the student contacting them) unless the list of people
> you
> > mention are all given the student's report or at least contact
> details.
> > Where does confidentiality go then - and how many people really need
> to
> > know
> > this sensitive personal data - apart from, as Penny G. says - for
> > administrative purposes.
> >
> > This is addressed to all... I go back to advocating a list of
> > professional
> > suppliers, support tutors, mentors and trainers from which the student
> > can
> > choose. If they don't like how or what the "supplier" communicates to
> > them
> > then they can go somewhere else and have at least a slightly more
> > informed
> > choice than perhaps they have now. Or is that too disempowering or
> > burdensome for the student to give them some control or choice of how
> to
> > use
> > their DSA. And lets make this good thing available to all students and
> > not
> > just disabled ones. We could call it the Holistic Enabling Learning
> for
> > Productive Study allowance or HELPS for short, at least until the
> > introduction of Universal Design.
> >
> > I suggest we take this up with our MPs and if you are in Wales then
> you
> > may
> > want to vote for Cardiff's Karen Robson in the forthcoming elections.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> > Alex
> >
> > Alex Larg
> >
> > [log in to unmask]
> > 07931 561 877 or 07916 175 077
> > Freelance Assistive Technology Trainer
> > Freelance study needs assessor
> > Former Disability Officer
> >
> >
> >
> > On 27/3/07 14:28, "Maiden, Arnold" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > > It seems to me that (assuming that the student's are in receipt of
> DSA)
> > > that the issue of Training should be discussed at the time of the
> > > Assessment and then any recommendations will be in the
> > > report/Application for DSA.
> > >
> > > This is certainly my practice and if I wasn't recommending training
> for
> > > software that the student had not previously used I would discuss
> this
> > > with the student and explain why I was not recommending it in the
> final
> > > report.
> > >
> > > I also, wherever possible, include in the report, contact
> information
> > > for AT Trainer, Dyslexia Support Tutor, Equipment Supplier/s, etc.
> > > wherever this is appropriate. I would also hope that these various
> > > suppliers would also contact the student direct once approval is
> > granted
> > > but often students move, change mobile number, etc. and are not
> always
> > > easy to contact so I see info in the report as a fall back position
> for
> > > the student.
> > >
> > > I am pretty confident in saying that most assessors do pretty much
> the
> > > same as I do but I guess that not all students read their reports.
> > >
> > > Arnold Maiden
> > > Assessor & Assistive Technology Advisor
> > > Leeds Metropolitan University
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
> > > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Emma Wright
> > > Sent: 27 March 2007 14:10
> > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > Subject: Re: training
> > >
> > > I just want to clarify something I said the other day and should
> have
> > > been clearer about at the time... I've spoken to a few students
> from
> > > a few universities and although all of these have said they were not
> > > offered training, they are not likely to be representative of all
> > > students, and my next task is to contact the staff responsible for
> > > offering training to see what percentage of the whole are offering
> > > training. Indeed, one university representative has already been in
> > > touch to say they do offer training to most students. The students
> at
> > > that university actually said that although they hadn't been offered
> > > training, they didn't really feel they needed it anyway (which may
> > > translate to an offer having been made but turned down!).
> > >
> > > Training wasn't something I covered in a big way during my
> interviews
> > > as students gave me the impression that it wasn't that important to
> > > them, but the discussion on this board has made me rethink that. I
> > > know that personally I could have done with some training had there
> > > been enough money available for it, but it seems not all students
> feel
> > > the same. What I was intending to highlight in my post was the
> > > apparent difference between the assumption on this board that
> training
> > > is a given and students perceptions that they were not offered any
> > > (which may of course be incorrect) or that did not want it. I
> wonder
> > > how this translates in terms of feedback on the quality of training
> if
> > > students don't feel it is very important anyway, and on how good
> they
> > > perceive the equipment to be if they haven't been trained how to
> make
> > > full use of it.
> > >
> > > Anyway, this leads me to ask the following questions of you all, do
> > > you have any figures, or even anecdotes, hunches, etc, regarding the
> > > number of students that are offered training and those that take it
> > > up? What sort of software/hardware do you tend to offer training
> on,
> > > and which do you not? Does the funding tend to be readily available
> > > for this training? Do you have in-house or external trainers on
> hand
> > > for this? Do your students seem to feel training is important, and
> if
> > > not, why not? Any responses to any of the questions will be very
> > > welcome (preferably off list - [log in to unmask]) and will be
> > > used as background information to my PhD research.
> > >
> > > Emma
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 27/03/07, Nasser <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >> Hi Alex
> > >>
> > >> Can you let me know how you get your training referrals? Do you
> > > contact
> > >> students or are they passed on to you by the institution or the
> > > supplier?
> > >>
> > >> The reason for asking is that we often come across students that
> were
> > >> supposed to be trained by the institution but we find that they
> have
> > > not
> > >> received the training, In such circumstances we would like to refer
> > > them
> > >> back to other training providers who are based in the vicinity and
> if
> > > this
> > >> is provided by an assessment centre or University then even better.
> We
> > >> strongly feel receiving the training at early stages will prevent
> > > potential
> > >> problems and will significantly improve the quality of life for the
> > >> students. I think prevention is always better than the cure.
> > >>
> > >> We have our own trainers too but we either use them if the LEA
> > > requests us
> > >> to carry out the job or there are no other training providers
> nearby.
> > > We
> > >> previously found that pressuring students towards getting the
> training
> > >> confused some of them as they had been contacted and trained by
> other
> > >> trainers we hence had ended up duplicating the job which meant we
> > > could not
> > >> be paid for the training sessions. I think it is safer for us to
> let
> > > the
> > >> LEAs place the order with us to avoid such situation as well as not
> > > stepping
> > >> on other people's toes.
> > >>
> > >> At the moment we operate a system of providing information to some
> > > training
> > >> providers on the delivery of the equipment to the students so that
> the
> > >> training can be carried out at the earliest opportunity. I think
> the
> > > longer
> > >> the student has the equipment without the training the less likely
> it
> > >> becomes for them to take the recommended training. If you are
> > > interested in
> > >> receiving this information for your students please let me know.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Best wishes
> > >>
> > >> Nasser Siabi
> > >> Managing Director
> > >> Microlink PC (UK) Ltd
> > >> Direct: 02380 240 316
> > >> Mobile: 07870603128
> > >>
> > >> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> > > intended
> > >> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
> > > addressed.
> > >> If you receive this e-mail by mistake, please advise the sender
> > > immediately
> > >> by using the reply facility in your e-mail software. Also destroy
> and
> > > delete
> > >> the message from your computer. Please note that any views or
> opinions
> > >> presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not
> > >> necessarily represent those of Microlink. Finally, the recipient
> > > should
> > >> check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses.
> > > Microlink
> > >> accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted
> by
> > > this
> > >> email. Any modification of the contents of this e-mail is strictly
> > >> prohibited unless expressly authorised by the sender.
> > >> Microlink House, Brickfield Lane, Chandlers Ford, Southampton SO53
> > > 4DP
> > >> (Company number: 3325643)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support
> staff.
> > >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of alex larg
> > >> Sent: 27 March 2007 01:47
> > >> To: [log in to unmask]
> > >> Subject: FW: training
> > >>
> > >> Hi Emma,
> > >>
> > >> I am a freelance trainer, an assessor, a former disability officer
> and
> > > a
> > >> campaigner and so have an interest in your comments.
> > >>
> > >> I aim to offer a person-centred approach to the clients' training
> > > sessions
> > >> that I deliver and I don't feel that I need to know anything about
> a
> > > person
> > >> before I train them. I feel that this advance knowledge can lead to
> > > people
> > >> having certain preconceptions which isn't healthy and can lead to
> > > laziness
> > >> and complacency.
> > >>
> > >> I train in most software strategies, with the exception of JAWS as
> I
> > > am not
> > >> a user myself and don't currently have the time to develop my
> > > knowledge of
> > >> that complex program. I probably don't know everything about every
> > > program,
> > >> but I know how to find out quickly. I learn something new everyday
> > > from the
> > >> questions I am asked by clients - this may sound like I don't know
> > > much, but
> > >> there is a lot of truth to the saying - the more you know the more
> you
> > >> realize you don't know. I won't know anything soon :-)
> > >>
> > >> I also know what programs should do and so can reassure clients
> when
> > >> programs don't do what they should that it is not they (the client)
> > > who are
> > >> doing something wrong. This situation can be intimidating and off
> > > putting
> > >> for users. Again I feel this is exacerbated by underspecified
> > > machines.
> > >> Another thing I keep going on about on one list or another.
> > >>
> > >> Wherever possible I would try to relate training to the work that a
> > > student
> > >> has on the go. Where this is not possible the training might be
> aimed
> > > at
> > >> creating an individualised user manual for the user as they know
> how
> > > they
> > >> learn and how they will best remember. Visual, textual and/or
> > > aural/oral as
> > >> required. They may not know they know this, but I aim to help them
> to
> > >> realize this or at least begin to consider this and then suggest
> they
> > > carry
> > >> this philosophy through to other pieces of work.
> > >> I use plain English - non jargon - but using targeted essential
> > > language
> > >> which is used within computer systems - widely used vocabulary
> > > necessary to
> > >> function and interact. I will patiently repeat this language and
> any
> > > points,
> > >> if so required, until the client is comfortable and has grasped the
> > >> necessary information.
> > >>
> > >> I also don't have a set way of doing things as everyone is
> different
> > > and in
> > >> my opinion good training has a solid framework basis, but requires
> > >> flexibility to wrap around the clients' own learning styles.
> > >>
> > >> I work all around the country. Please contact me off list for any
> > > further
> > >> information. I would also be interested in the names of the three
> > >> universities you mention, off list.
> > >>
> > >> Best wishes,
> > >>
> > >> Alex
> > >>
> > >> Alex Larg
> > >>
> > >> [log in to unmask]
> > >> 07931 561 877 or 07916 175 077
> > >> Freelance Assistive Technology Trainer
> > >> Freelance study needs assessor
> > >> Former Disability Officer
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ------ Forwarded Message
> > >> From: Emma Wright <[log in to unmask]>
> > >> Reply-To: "Discussion list for disabled students and their support
> > > staff."
> > >> <[log in to unmask]>
> > >> Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 18:51:12 +0100
> > >> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > >> Subject: Re: training
> > >>
> > >> I keep hearing all this about training, but I've never been offered
> > >> any! Nor have any of the students I've interviewed as part of my
> > >> research across (so far) three universities. What sort of training
> > >> for what sort of software tends to be offered?
> > >>
> > >> Emma
> > >>
> > >> On 26/03/07, George Bell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >>> Might I perhaps suggest that people take a serious look at
> > >>> http://www.bcab.org.uk/training.html
> > >>>
> > >>> This is an initiative taken by the British Computer
> > >>> Association of the Blind (BCAB) in response to complaints
> > >>> about poor standards of training in the use of I.T.
> > >>> equipment.
> > >>>
> > >>> Many organisations, including the Department of Employment
> > >>> for example, are now insisting that contracted trainers are
> > >>> BTCS (BCAB Trainer Certification Scheme) approved.
> > >>>
> > >>> Food for thought?
> > >>>
> > >>> George Bell.
> > >>>
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>> From: Discussion list for disabled students and their
> > >>> support staff. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> > >>> Of David Austen
> > >>> Sent: 26 March 2007 13:51
> > >>> To: [log in to unmask]
> > >>> Subject: training
> > >>>
> > >>> Posted without comment
> > >>> extract from the 'form' letter sent out to students
> > >>> regarding their DSA
> > >>> provision. This is from a local LEA
> > >>> ( I do not think it is appropriate to name which one).
> > >>>
> > >>> "Recently, some students have informed us that they felt
> > >>> pressurized
> > >>> into accepting training provided by their University.
> > >>> Please note that the LEA only uses training companies who
> > >>> are
> > >>> thoroughly reliable and have many years' experience.with
> > >>> equipment
> > >>> training for disabled students.
> > >>> If you feel that you have been treated unfairly by any
> > >>> individual or by
> > >>> a professional body, please contact us immediately and we
> > >>> will ensure
> > >>> appropriate action is taken".
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Emma Jane Wright
> > >> School of Sociology and Social Policy
> > >> University of Nottingham
> > >>
> > >> [log in to unmask]
> > >>
> > >> www.accessingmaterials.org.uk
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ------ End of Forwarded Message
> > >>
> > >> Sent using the Microsoft Entourage 2004 for Mac Test Drive.
> > >>
> > >
> >
> > Sent using the Microsoft Entourage 2004 for Mac Test Drive.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> To view the terms under which this email is distributed, please go to
> http://disclaimer.leedsmet.ac.uk/email.htm
>
>
> This e-mail is private and may be confidential and is for the intended recipient only. If you are not the intended recipient you are strictly prohibited from using, printing, copying, distributing or disseminating this e-mail or any information contained in it.
>
>
> We virus scan all E-mails leaving The University of Northampton but no warranty is given that this E-mail and any attachments are virus free. You should undertake your own virus checking. The right to monitor E-mail communications through our networks is reserved by us.
>

---

With Live Spaces email straight to your blog. Upload jokes, photos and more. It's free! It's free!