CompuServe Messages

I *knew* ADVANSTAR had a familiar ring to it. Now you're touching on an area that expands the crux of the argument. Teaching AutoCAD as opposed to tailoring an environment specific training program. When I started doing training as a consultant I offered a satisfaction or your money back guarantee. I also spent several days pestering my client's personnel and somtimes actually performing work for them to help understand the specifics of their installation. I've given up on this approach and slid over to teaching at the college level because immersing myself became so time comsuming, not that it wasn't worth it for both myself and the client, but because being a jack of all trades led to so many other paths that I got to the point that I had to decide to go 100% consultant – I'm not a very good boss, I like that paycheck every other week<G>. At the 2-yr college where I teach, the architectural end is covered with the use of KETIV. That isn't my baliwick but it is the way to go IMHO. It's tough to go discipline specific because not all disciplines respond to that approach, mechanical being one of them. There are too many ways to apply mechanical to settle on any one approach as a universal constant. When you get into Civil or P&ID you enter niche markets that are best handled by consultants familiar with the field. It's a real can of worms, but I look foward to any views, from anybody, as to how to make the certification viable for more than just the `tool'.