Wasting Time When Training: Why???

I have a history of both teaching in schools as well as training in organisations, and I have found that people really, really like to waste time. Teachers generally get paid regardless, but trainers often get paid by the hour. The more time wasted, the less work they are paid to do.

I was recently asked by a student why I just dove into the subject matter after a brief but informative introduction  "Usually trainers give an introductory session" smirk. I suppose the fine line between a teacher and trainer will always be cause for a comment or two, and this is due to the fact that teachers aren't given as much importance as a trainer.

Now, before I tell you how I answered, let me explain what I think draws the line between a teacher and a trainer, in Pakistan at least. A trainer will most likely have a respectable amount of experience in a business setting behind them. A teacher will most probably have a respectable amount kids behind them (usually her). Forgetting the history of the battle of the genders in Pakistan (a whole new series of blogs that one...) and its influence on how the popularly viewed feminine profession of teaching is seen (and another whole new series about blogs that, too...), a teacher will almost always try to make sure that their student has learnt the material.

Take Business English TEFL teachers. They, too, come in contact with business professionals. A TEFL teacher, however, will always wade through their students' mind sets, personalities, environment and lives to at the very least try to get the message embedded and then help them to use that knowledge.

A trainer will on the other hand, act like a university lecturer, I remember a brilliant lecturer who once in the middle of a lecture on symbolism, pointed at a student who had her hand raised and said "This is NOT a discussion, this is a lecture". Needless to say, I thought it was a little unkind. That said, it wasn't a discussion.

While things aren't that extreme with trainers, I mean they do allow for and in fact prefer a more interactive approach, a trainer will give their ideas, discuss it shortly with the session or the class, and then leave. Maybe this practice began because when you train, you're most likely speaking to professionals who have some sort of education behind them (which could be helpful). Also, you can expect them to make the effort and try to learn and read up on the knowledge you are attempting to transfer. It would be the professional thing to.

Unfortunately, finding professionalism is rare, in fact the most professional places that I have found are multinationals that set up factories in the middle of nowhere, rather than inside main city limits. And they're societies unto themselves. Of course, this holds true for Pakistan, and also very expensive multinationals with good 'core values' whatever that means.

To conclude - teachers will hammer a concept into a student's mind, whether or not he is ten years old or manages the finance department. While this is helpful, and ultimately desirable, a trainer's way of expecting, or rather, assuming that a student will go home and work or atleast bend his more polished mind to the concepts taught is more respectful and that goes far in trying to teach people.

I believe a mixture of both forms of educating. Teaching and training, using the best of both worlds.

Oh and I responded with "Would you like me to waste your time?" Perhaps that wasn't the best answer I could give.