#Instructor Certification
35 messages in this thread
Some time ago there was a great thread going on here concerning Instructor
Certification. The comments were very useful and informative, and supported the
reason this forum exists: to get feedback on issues and ideas from others.
I am currently putting together a "Steering Committee" on Instructor
Certification, and our first meeting will be on Monday Aug. 16th at CAD Camp. I
have a few goals in mind for the group, but how we achieve them is not clear
(yet). It is our intention to create a process and procedure, similar in policy
to the ACE, that a current or potential AutoCAD Instructor can be "Certified"
to teach AutoCAD.
I am hoping to see more traffic on this issue, in response to this message.
Please understand that we are currently working with a "clean slate", with no
pre-concieved ideas how this should be achieved, so this is your chance to
contribute to the process. Remember, if you don't speak up now, you can't
complain later when it's a "done deal" and didn't come out the way you want.
I am looking forward to carrying a fat pile of messages to the meeting. Please
respond here with your input. Thanks in advance!
-KLF
Hi Ken!
Don't the ATC's that are Technical Colleges require 14,000 Hours of "Practical
work experience" before they will hire you?
Just trying to start something. <g>
James M. Murphy
James:
Uh… I think you might have the wrong number. A person would have to work
for 7 years (40 hrs/week) before they were qualified using your number of
14,000 hours. I believe the number is something like 400 hours to teach Basic,
and 800 hours to teach Intermediate and above. I may be wrong on that, and I
don't have my P & P manual handy (sorry Wayne, but I don't have the thing
memorized cover to cover <g>).
Thanks for the response. This type of thing will be ONE characteristic that we
will include in the qualifications.
-KLF
Ken…..
>> A person would have to work for 7 years (40 hrs/week) before they were
qualified using your number of 14,000 hours <<
Actually I was refering to a Non-Degreed person. This was the figure quoted to
me by a local ATC. I was Jus' doing a reality check.
>> I believe the number is something like 400 hours
to teach Basic, and 800 hours to teach Intermediate and above. I may be
wrong on that, and I don't have my P & P manual handy (sorry Wayne, but I don't
have the thing memorized cover to cover <g>). <<
Hmmmmm…..methinks I should get my hands on a P & P manual.
You wouldn't happen to be able to tell me where I might obtain one for a peruse
would you Ken.
James M. Murphy
Authorized AutoCAD Dealer 4.5 years
Currently an Authorized Multimedia Dealer for the past 1.5 years.
Will this and 25 cents buy me a cup o' coffee? <g>
Murph'
James,
The 14,000 hr figure seems high. Thats about 4 to 5 times the occupational
experience needed here in PA. for vocational technical instruction. I just
added an additional state certification to my instructor certificate and had to
prove 2500 hrs of on the job skilled work experience.
We have a great shortage of hands-on skilled instructors in the US today and
many unemployed military industry workers are rushing in to fill the jobs, BUT
they may have great tech skill experience but could be terrible teachers. In
fact, time has shown that the highly skilled craftsman types are usually not
the best instructor types. This fact has been shown in research many times.
Please keep adding your thoughts to this thread
Thanks,
PAT
Ken,
When is the meeting? Do you want a copy of all the messages from this thread?
Get Back.
Thanks,(:-}
PAT
Pat:
If it's convenient to compile all the past and future messages on this topic,
I'd certainly appreciate it. Having recently changed computers and comm
software means that my past messages have become scattered across several hard
disks and subdirectories. Things got kinda fragmented, unfortunatly.
We will be meeting on Monday 8/16 at CAD Camp. I will be posting results and
developments as we proceed.
-KLF
>> Instructor Certification
Ken,
PLEASE DO NOT MAKE ANOTHER BEAUROCRACY! How about this to keep it simple.
#1) Have course guidelines and minimum specifications
#2) Have an Autodesk produced Course Eval form. that students are required to
fill-out after the exam. The certified places would be rrequired to submit
these on a periodic basis. Also, they would be required to provide something
with an Adesk # for complaints.
If a center has too many complaints, they have their certification revoked. If
you provide a way to "flush the toilet" every once in a while, they rest of the
system will take care of itself.
Ang
Angelo,
We already have all that in place…We've been using that for a looong time.
The discussion is about the quality of instructors. The ACE (AutoCAD
Certification Exam) is supposed to give you a good measure of someone's
knowledge in AutoCAD and how that person can apply it to his or her field.
That's OK. Now the next question: How can you measure someone's ability to
*teach* and *pass on* these skills to other people? That's the question here
(Sorry, Shakespeare).
To put it in different words, there's nothing wrong with the sewers or the
toilets, we would just like to see how you teach someone to flush'em.
Mark K.
Mark:
Not sure I would have used that analogy, but it sure gets the messages across
(er…. through) <g>.
I'd very much like to get your input on this. Will you be at CAD Camp? If so,
perhaps we could get together for a cold one on Sunday. I assume you're gonna
be busy with the curriculum meetings. I'm staying at the Embassy, arriving late
Saturday evening.
-KLF
Ken,
Unfortunately I'm having a PPT here in Sheridan College that week (I assume
that's the week of Aug. 16)?
I don't think I can make it unless I clone myself.
Mark K.
Mark:
When you get that cloning procedure figured out, please let me know. Until
then, have a good PPT session, and I will be in touch. Sorry I won't see you
there.
-KLF
>> how to ID someones "teaching" ability
Maan,
That is much more a function of personallity than knowledge and experience. I
wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a solution for that. Maybe what you need
to do is have an 1/2 hour oral exam (over the phone) with the prospects. Face
to face (or mouth to ear in this case)… in real action .. is the only way you
will be able to judge someone "explainatory" (hows that for a Haigism)
capabilities.
Hea … now that's not a bad idea. It would certainly be the most cost
effective as far as Adesk is concerned and since you are trying to determine
something which is very "qualitative" in nature, this kind'a interaction with
the "Certification GateKeeper" would be a must.
Ang
Angelo:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you are confusing ATC Site Certification
with Instructor Certification. This would be a certification that would be
attached to a person, not a specific training site.
For example, ESRI has a program to certify ArcCAD Instructors, and also a
system for ArcCAD Learning Centers. Only Certified Instructors can teach ArcCAD
courses, but it must be taught at an Authorized Learning Center. Anyone
(dealers included) can apply for Learning Center status, without necessarily
have a permanent person on staff that is a Certified Instructor.
The ATC requirements are pretty well set up and (hopefully) being honored by
all the ATCs. I'm not sure how policing is done, other than minimum evaluation
ratings and Instructors must attend PPT each year (ahem! Wake up everybody!!
Yes THIS IS A REQUIREMENT!!!).
We are attempting a way to ensure the actual instructors are capable and
providing effective training. This applies to all AutoCAD instructors, not
necessarly at ATCs. So, it should be known up front that this process will NOT
be exclusive to ATC instructors (oh boy, this outta get the fur flyin!!).
However, an ATC would be foolish not to get all their instructors certified.
See the difference now? Thanks for the input…..
-KLF
Hello again Ken,
>> Anyone (dealers included) can apply for Learning Center status, without
necessarily have a permanent person on staff that is a Certified Instructor. <<
I'd be interested in finding out more about this Learning Center Status as a
Dealer I would like to share my materials as well as have a source for
additional teaching materials for my clients.
Who could I contact as I will not be attending Cad Camp this year, I have to
fly out in Sept. and just can't justify two trips that close together.
>> We are attempting a way to ensure the actual instructors are capable and
providing effective training. This applies to all AutoCAD instructors, not
necessarly at ATCs. So, it should be known up front that this process will NOT
be exclusive to ATC instructors (oh boy, this outta get the fur flyin!!).
However, an ATC would be foolish not to get all their instructors certified. <<
I'm all for this idea Ken….How much training, Where would it be held and what
kind of testing? Just a thought but the Drake people do a real good job of
certifying Novel Levels with their program…maybe that would be worth looking
in to as a prototype or even an arrangement could be made directly with Drake.
James M. Murphy
JAMES MURPHY CONSULTING
Green Bay Wisconsin
James…
As a board member for the AutoCAD Certification Exam, I can say that Drake is
already providing the testing (and has been for over a year) for the
"operators" part of the exam.
As the Instructor Certification gets a little better defined, undoubtedly,
we'll be build that test tooooo!! Keep in mind that the instructors
certification will consist of more than "just" a test, which is all being
reviewed as we "speak". Keep the killer input going, though….it has an
influencing impact!!
Hit Return…Bill Elliott
Ken,
Well, the feedback system could also work by having the instructors name on the
eval as well. Basically what I'm suggesting is to apply some TQM approaches to
this system.
I also responded to Maan with a suggestion of an "over the phone oral exam".
Teaching capability is a "real-time" capability .. not easily decernable thru
repetition of fact. It (as you know) has much more to do with the capability
to evaluate a particular students needs in the context of certain information
or concepts which need to be illuminated. In an interactive oral exam, the
"Certificator" could ask the instructor to explain a concept a couple different
ways, illustrating this important "dyanamic" capability.
I don't believe you will find a "quantitative" approach and the results will be
largly subjective .. but so is the capability that you are trying to measure.
Ang
Angelo…
Regarding your recent response…
>>the feedback system could also work by having the instructors name on the
eval as well<<
..the Autodesk evaluation forms have a section at the bottom wherein there is a
place to put the instructors "code", which is assigned by the ATC and Adesk.
Autodesk uses this code to track the classes as well as the instructor.
Trouble is….there are "millions" more folks teaching AutoCAD thsat don't have
to (or get to) use these forms because they are reserved exclusively for
Authorized Training Centers (ATC's)…too bad, 'cause there are some great
training facilities around this nation that are simply not in the ATC
status….
Regarding the second comment…
>>I also responded to Maan with a suggestion of an "over the phone oral exam<<
..this is a fabulous idea…maybe even determine a particular feature of
AutoCAD and have the individual "explain" how to use it…say Grips for
example…How to enable them; How to "get" one; How to toggle through the
options; How to use the temporary Snap Grid, blah, blah, blah…
Hit Return…Bill Elliott
>> oral … shmoral
Bill,
I guess the concept which I was trying to communicate (and which seems to have
been lost) is the following:
The distinguishing difference between an "ok" instructor and a "great"
instructor is that persons capability to explain difficult CONCEPTS in a myriad
of different ways .. in effect painting the same picture with different brushes
and colors until the student get the point. A student, once shown a "fact",
can typically recall or find that fact or that series of steps from the
reference manual. "Concepts" and "approaches" on the other hand are another
thing entirely and this is the area in which an instructor is the most
beneficial. Facts and figures are easily tested and I agree that these are
important, but I THOUGHT what you were trying to get was a way to determine
those "qualitative" attributes which make an instuctor an effective
communicator. These are the type of attributes which I was refering to in my
suggestion for an "oral exam".. not "how do you use grips" … but rather "what
is paper space" .. or "local coordinates" .. etc
Ang
Angelo…
It's great having this dialogue for the instructor certification…this is the
stuff we really need the "see". In response to your message…I'm convinced
we're talking about the very same things….in fact, one of your last
statements…
>but I THOUGHT what you were trying to get was a way to determine >those
"qualitative" attributes which make an instuctor an effective >communicator
..BINGO!!! Using the video tape, or a telephone interview, or simply have an
assigned "reviewer" attend one of the lecture sessions of the testing
instructor, is precisely what we're trying to hammer out. Which method is most
effective and best evaluates the individual is the BASIC point-o-discussion (oh
great…no you've got ME shouting).
My references to the use of Grips, in the first place, is a running JOKE here
on CSERVE, but in the second place, is an effort to present a mechanism for
evaluating the instructors ability to communicate (not only verbally, but
conceptually). Which commands and features of AutoCAD we decide to use will be
determined later, but still….
Being able to telephone interview someone and have them explain a feature of
AutoCAD, can probably be one of a number of solutions for the
oral (and this is not a SCHMORAL) portion of the testing. We communicate with
our hands, with pictures, with voice inflections, and even with on-screen
examples. We're simply trying to determine how, or even IF, we can best
evaluate this portion of an instructors character…and once evaluated,
determine the "weight" of these characteristics on the whole model of an
Autodesk Certified Instructor.
You keep this kinda dialogue up, and you'll get volunteered!!! Do you feel
that the ORAL part of the testing should not be pursued?? Do you think a video
interview, or telephone interview is un-necessary?? Granted, being able to
"speak" does -not an instructor make-, or even a solid knowlegde of the
subject…somehow, we've got to at least measure these characteristics.
Hit Return…Bill Elliott
Bill,
All good points. The stongest point regarding the "over the phone oral" idea
(and I'm not talking any kinky stuff here <g>) is the cost effectiveness and
convienence factors for both Adesk and the perspective instructor. I agree to
you comment regarding other forms of communication, (hand gestures, etc ..) but
in essence, they are still "window dressing" for the verbal portion.
s
Ang
Some of the fundamentals requirements….
A. Instructional experience – either a teaching credential or time " at the
wheel"
B. Working experience – Autodesk mandates 2 years hands-on usage of the
product for the ATC instructors (like that's being supported!!).
C. A psychology degree – (just kidding!!) But there should be some way to
determine HOW the instructor interfaces with the masses.
D. Public speaking skills – an ability to disseminate information in a variety
of methods is essential. The information being presented could be the best
stuff developed, but the delivery could kill!!!
These are four areas that stand out to me. Obviously, each has other related
topics and "sub-directories", but these seems to be the basic catagories from
my perspective.
Hit Return…Bill Elliott
Bill:
Right on! We're together so far. But, how do we accomplish some of these goals
for evaluation? Some of it can be done with a resume/portfolio. The ACE will
also be very helpful on the technical end.
I'm looking for ideas on how we can REALISTICALLY evaluate a person's teaching
skills. Suggestions have run from videotaping them in action to having a
special class at selected ATCs for Instructor Certification.
Thanks for the input. Keep 'em coming!!
-KLF
Ken,
I know it leads to a catch 22, but the best way would be to give tests to
students who have completed a semester with the instructor and compare results
to an acceptable mean. As a full time user and part-time instructor of AutoCAD
I tend to use different methods and teach using different approaches than the
full time faculty.
The 2-year school that I teach at has no common tests to use for comparison
and the content of some of the other sections is skewed towards 3D as opposed
to the 2D emphasis that I espouse.
I guess I'm good at what I teach because I teach what I'm good at. My
effectiveness might suffer were I to attempt Calculus instruction, considering
I haven't passed Calc II yet<G>.
Dennis
Dennis:
Good suggestion. I can think of a flaw, though. What about the folks that want
to get certified, but aren't currently teaching? Also, it would seem you would
need a minimum of student responses for the results to be "statistically
reliable". In other words, if I teach a class of 4 and have a bad group, this
could drastically effect my rating, but if I do a group of 30, and have the
same 4 "bad apples", but have 26 star pupils, I'm gonna do much better.
I also teach CAD classes at our 2-year school, and my Spring class usually has
about 30-32 students. I consistently average about 8-10% that are
"unreachable". They don't see the reason, don't care, and fail miserably. But,
my ATC people are always attentive and want to learn.
-KLF
Ken,
8-10%!? Gads, I'd stop teaching. JUST KIDDING!!<G> I did say it was
a catch 22. I know where you're coming from. I started at the Adult
VocEd level and was disappointed with the disparity in the abilities
of the raw material I had to work with. I only had one student that I
couldn't reach, he worked for a company that converted vehicles for
use by challenged individuals. It was disparaging for me at first,
but it became obvious that the student did not have the attitude nor
the motivation to succeed in the class and I had to live with the
fact that a student had actually dropped MY class. I've also had to
deal with Retraining Program students from General Motors. These
people tend to show up simply because they get paid to do so. It
makes things challenging, but remembering that they're more tactile
than most gives me a bit of an edge in keeping them interested. I
used to be extremely biased in requiring a drafting background in my
students at the 2-year school, but I've tempered that tone. Taking
for granted that everybody knows what a three view drawing is can
lead to problems. Maybe I'm the exception, but I don't allow any
student to fail unless that student walks out on me. My teaching
methods have been called into question as being too aggressive (even
belittling), but I do get the attention of my students and
tenaciously drag them through the pitfalls this software presents us.
It's such wonderful therapy, and they pay me to do it!
Ken…
If they're teaching at an ATC, we can simply use their evals to determine how
they "come across"…'course, that's a no-brainer. If they're not at an ATC,
then we can possibly develop a survey for their training sites "administration"
to complete?? More paper work…but some folks get camera shy, so the video
may incriminate!!!
More than likely…a quick visit to their local ATC to let them "guest teach"
for about two hours during one of the ATC's regularly scheduled classes. The
ATC manager can review the presentation, blah, blah, blah…
..therefore, is certification broken into basic division yet….you know,
something like…
A) Knowledge
B) Work Experience
C) Delivery
D) Curriculum Development
..I tossed in the Curric Develop stuff..seems a given, but do these certified
instructors need to have demonstrated abilities to document their training
approach??? Seems like…
Hit Return…Bill Elliott
Hey Guys…..
Gosh It seems like Its been a long time since "I let my fingers do the
talking".
The current thread on Instructor Certification seems right on course. We
do need ways to evaluate the Instructor's teaching ability… and has already
been pointed out we already have some of that in place. Are those evaluations
being used to their fullest. The ATC's get a report card on their effectiveness
over the year at the ATC Manager's meeting. Mabye something should be done
regarding the Teacher's feedback. Sort of an annual report Card from
Autodesk…. Let you know overall how you're doing. I went over my evals last
week and It always feels good to read the good comments and makes you think
when there is a bad one…. That's another thing if it could be somehow
promoted to write in more comments these are usually the most useful..
Next… along with Instructor Certification I seem to remember that
Instructor Development was also an issue to be discussed prioritised ??? Now I
know that you all may go and say… first things first… but I don't feel that
way these two things should be done in tandum…. not one thing then another
the other may just get forgotten…. The current craze over testing IMHO.. is
overlooking an important point that is Human Resource Development..
Certification and testing seems to put the entire onus on the individual to get
themselves up to speed without any help from employers and institutions. In
fact the certification procedure becomes a condition of employment….
I can see how the certification process will work at our ATC. With over
20 part time teachers probably. All of them except a few will be required to
put the money for the test and where will these tests be held ? at all ATC
centers ??? or will they have to travel to get there ??? And then well If ya
don't do it well….. we just can't give you any more courses……Ok Ok so I'm
really getting negative here….
I believe that certification should really start at a higher level on a
limited basis. (we should certify the ETS group before anyone else) (mud pies
away <g>). Wordperfect has a certification program for instructors. Do they
have a development program ?? good question ??
Now what It seems to me that what Ken went through at ArCAD wasn't just
certification but development as well. It seemed to me like a good ideal to
aim for but to also remember how diverse AutoCAD is and how do you certify an
instructor of AutoCAD for a specific desclipline with examples from another ??
If they can't explain GRIPS does that proclude them from being a good
instructor ??
IMHO we at Vanier lost last year one of the best teachers we had because
he did not pass a R11 technical multiple choice exam. A one hour exam and that
was it… This guy had one of the best teaching approaches in our institute and
was really into it (he owned his own laptop and color LCD overhead device).. He
always taught at the intro level and was darn good at it. Now ? we don't hear
from the guy… That's a shame.. not something I like to see have happen on an
official basis from Autodesk….
Last, semester one of my advanced students asked me how to get into
teaching specifically at our center… And I really didn't have an answer for
him besides.. "try to get some teaching experience" unfortunately they won't
hire anyone without it…But how do you get the experience ?? Ya all know that
old catch 22….
Tapped out… Roger C@V
Roger…
Regarding concurrent development of the Instructor Certification and the
Instructor Development Program….
It DOES seems only natural to build and support both these programs together.
With MicroSoft, however, there are a numerous books and study guides on the
market….and MicroSoft will test and certify you on that knowledge.
Levels of certification are what is needed also. Just as we're build "levels"
of Operator Certification Exams, which tests and certifies their levels on
knowledge, we'll undoubtedly get to this with Instructor Certification. This
model would have probably "saved" you're – dearly departed- instructor last
year.
Hit Return… Bill Elliott
Hello,
I think the ATC evaluations offer Autodesk the opportunity to keep tabs on
the ATC's, but are a great tool for the ATC managers as well! The instructors
and I can sit down and go over them together and discuss equipment, handouts,
lab assistants, teaching, etc. Our handout scores started dropping so we have
developed our own evaluation forms we ask the participants to fill out that ask
more specific questions on the curiculum so we can make changes. We have used
end of the semester evaluation forms for self evaluation as well as tenure
documents for many years here at Purdue.
David
Bill:
I like your list. Part A we cover with the ACE (Level I and II). Part B can be
accomplished with a resume/portfolio of past work.
I was also considering a curriculum development component. I'd have to be
careful, cause my own standards are pretty high here. I saw a training manual
the other day that didn't contain a single graphic or screen shot. Just pages
of typed text, all in the same font, very bland and boring. To me, that is
unacceptable.
The Delivery portion is the tough one. In general, I don't agree that a phone
interview accomplishes this. I know I feel much more comfortable with some
visual aides (whiteboard, demo machine, etc.) to work with to enhance the
demonstrations. The phone interview would miss this.
Which leads me back to the videotaped sessions. I agree these can be rehearsed
with "planted students". The camera-shy element is there, but I'm not sure this
should be an excuse. The other option is a special "Certification Seminar"
where presentations are made and critiqued.
-KLF
Bill,
Good points. offical state certification requires about 2000 hrs of pedogogical
courses, including psych classes and public speaking, about 90 hrs of video
taped self review of you on the job. And a video resume. There is a good person
here at the university who has developed some new analysis methods to evaluate
quaility instruction. She would probably consult on this if needed.
We should not remake the wheel. Will any one volunteer to do an investigation
of the existing research. The whole field of learning engineering didn't exist
when most of us were in school last. It is a new area that has come about due
to military research grant funding for computer based learning. Very exciting
stuff and very heavy on improving methods of delivery and retention and doing
yourvteaching in such a way the it is hitting all the identified learning
styles of todays students.
Keep going,
PAT
Say Pat…
Can you get me in touch with the lady person??? I'd be "very" interested in
pursuing the learning engineering (hence the company name Hit Return). My
office number is (602) 596-1350 in Phoenix AZ.
Also, is it possible to share some of the developments you're college has
"realized" with Ken Flesher (he's the one with the -steering wheel- in the big
car!!!)??
Hit Return…Bill Elliott
Bill, Some of the people involved in these projects are out of town until the
new semester begins Aug 25. I will be away for a week starting tommorrow but
will check my voice mail at 814-237-8078. When I return I will get it together
for Ken and you. I think there is some significant information to be
contributed to our cause here.
BtW- what did ya mean about what Hit Return stands for? I am unclear as to your
meaning.
PAT
Ken,
Some criteria you might look at are:
1. Course outline
2. Years and level taught taught
3. Field-based experience
4. Knowledge
a. accessment will be key — just remember that teachers wear many
hats and not many have the time or energy left to learn all the new
tricks. So if accessment comes to be take this into consideration
and possible create multiple levels of certification.
5. Rewards
a. What benefit(s) are associated with becoming certified?
This has an obvious effect on those desiring to become certified. If
it can be linked to in-service type training requirments or something similar
that "certified" teachers are not required "by their state and local boards" to
attend I would feel this would be a good promotional item. Just how you would
go about doing it I do not know — however I think I can get this done for you
in the state of Kentucky. Just let me know…
JE