I am looking to become qualified as a trainer and as such I would like to know which of the following courses is,
A. Most recognised in the training industry?
B. Which is the better course from a practical skills perspective?
Any further advice that any could offer would be really appreciated. Thank you.
Damian Rawcliffe
by
by
by
Leaders need to stop the self-sacrifice cycle
Middle management’s biggest challenge
Unlocking courage
Elevate your L&D expertise by subscribing to TrainingZone’s newsletter! Get curated insights, premium reports, and event updates from industry leaders.
28 Responses
CIPD
The CIPD course is more widely recognised and more current in its content.
Not true
The CIPD course is not the most recognised qualification in the training industry at all.
There are many valuable train the trainer courses out there and the big question should be, before embarking on any of them, what is it that you want to train?
This will make a massive difference to your choice as an IT trainer will not necessarily benefit from a soft skills focused course any more than a soft skills practioner would from an IT focus and so on…
And as far as the Certificate in Training Practice goes from the CIPD, I’d avoid it and that seems to be the common consensus on http://www.trainingzone.co.uk where this argument has raised it’s head time and time again.
I have to disagree
Sorry – I have to disagree here. The CIPD Certificate in Training Practice is and has been for many years, a standard across industry not least because its focus in broader than purely delivery skills. I put a number of trainers through the qualification – including IT Trainers – and it proved invaluable especially as their careers developed. Whilst there are many courses and qualifications which focus on delivery skills, the CIPD CTP will help L&D professionals to develop a broader appreciation of their practice and its organisational context.
No need for qualifications – CIPD acknowledge affilate membershi
I agree with Nik and disagree with Wayne who offers limited measurable evidence to support his assertion.
There is more depth within the link that I attach together with a large discussion on the worth of CTP to trainers within the CIPD. With 69% of training jobs not requiring it the CIPD has had to introduce its Affiliate Level of membership to take account of those trianers who dont want to or have no need to follow its courses.
Perhaps the CIPD has recognised that there are alternatives that trainers and employers require and that CTP isnt the bees knees they’d like to think it is.
It really isnt necessary – experience and exposure count for more these days, the only people who will ask for CIPD membership are CIPD members (typically those who have come via the HR route and never really studied training in any great depth).
Do examine this link
https://www.trainingzone.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=128024
Community
Juliet,
Damien was asking for advice. Remember that this is a community site. We are all entitled to express an opinion based on our experience.
Axiomatic
Thanks for that unecessary interjection Wayne which added little. I simply offered my perspective with evidence.
Self evidently, I proffered an opinion and am equally allowed to disagree.
Limited Measurable Evidence?
“the only people who will ask for CIPD membership are CIPD members (typically those who have come via the HR route and never really studied training in any great depth)”
Mmm…
My 2 Cents
Nik Kellingley wrote: “The CIPD course is not the most recognised qualification in the training industry at all”.
I don’t know on what basis this assertion is made. I don’t recall ever seeing a survey that has been undertaken to distinguish between the various training qualifications and so personally I cannot confirm or deny that the CIPD qualification is not the most recognised qualification. Failing this any view expressed on this issue is of dubious credence.
Nik Kellingley continued “And as far as the Certificate in Training Practice goes from the CIPD, I’d avoid it and that seems to be the common consensus on http://www.trainingzone.co.uk where this argument has raised it’s head time and time again.”
Again, I don’t know how this conclusion has been reached either. A search for the topic ‘Certificate in Training Practice’ on Training Zone appears to reveal no such consensus, but certainly a lot of polarised views. Don’t take my word for it; do a search your self. Here are some interesting threads to follow up:
https://www.trainingzone.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=128024
https://www.trainingzone.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=147408&d=728&h=608&f=626&dateformat=%25e-%25h-%25y
I would suggest that if you want to find out which is the most recognised or most wanted qualification (which is probably more important) I would look at adverts for training roles, jobs and related functions. Graham O’Connell undertook some research in this area and produced some interesting results, to quote: ‘Our research of job ads (over 250 over a recent three month period, for example) shows that for jobs in Learning, Development, Training and/or HRD, 49.4% required a CIPD or equivalent qualification. 20.2% mentioned an academic qualification (eg Masters). 3.9% wanted a sector specific qualification.’
Roughly half of relevant job advertisers it would appear seem to specify the qualification they prefer or desire and the Certificate in Training Practice most certainly features there. Again, don’t take my word for it; check it out your self and look at the adverts for jobs you would be interested in.
Frankly I’m not bothered which qualification you go for, but I’d rather you made an informed choice based on some real research rather than be influenced by people like me or some else who are either pro or anti CIPD or what ever.
Juliet LeFevre stated: “the only people who will ask for CIPD membership are CIPD members (typically those who have come via the HR route and never really studied training in any great depth)”.
How do you know this?
P.S. I am a deliver of the CTP here at Woodland Grange bit also offer training qualifications from other award bodies.
Good Luck.
Oh dear
It’s certainly put the cat among the pigeons this so I’ll use a bit of my own evidence – I subscribe to and recieve 5 job lists every day for training jobs in west yorkshire and the UK as a whole.
I am an IT trainer, a soft skills trainer, a management trainer and a coach. So I tend to cast my net a little wider than most trainers.
This morning’s results have brought approximately 50 different adverts to me – and exactly none of these training vacancies requires a CITP. That said most of them are for technical trainers.
But that’s just me.
So let me spell it out about how a large number of trainers of my aquaintance feel about the CITP and the CIPD – it’s a badly thought out basic course which is both overpriced and lacking in content (that’s the CITP done with) and as for the CIPD there is much agreement which with a slightly better search of training zone you would have found (try clicking on my name and checking some of the threads regarding training qualifications and people wanting to get a start in training) that shows even chartered status trainers feel that the CIPD is a body which does not represent the profession. But is in fact geared entirely to HR professionals (for whom, admittedly it does a darned good job) and treats training professionals as ugly sisters (or brothers) with a badly thought out framework which is geared around training as a secondary function to HR.
Which it is not.
For other well recognised training courses you could try:
MCT – Microsoft Certified Trainer (pays well if you like your IT)
Siebel Trainer
Oracle Trainer
Fenman Train the Trainer events
and honestly I could go on for hours
So I’ll say it again – go for what suits you, there is no need to be a sheep because a group of people say the CITP is for you, anymore than there is a need to leave the flock because I say to do so.
But do, do a training needs analysis and make your decision based on what you actually want to do.
And finally, I suspect Juliet has the right of it all when she says there is no substitute for experience.
Check this link out too – it seems that it’s been missed out of the debate:
https://www.trainingzone.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=140576
Oh Dear Indeed
Nik Kellingley wrote: ‘This morning’s results have brought approximately 50 different adverts to me – and exactly none of these training vacancies requires a CITP. That said most of them are for technical trainers.’
I’m not convinced this is entirely relevant. Does a technical trainer require a CiTP qualification? If my interpretation of this function is correct I’d have thought it was for the greater part irrelevant, so it’s no real surprise that the qualification is omitted. You wouldn’t ask for a shorthand qualification if you were recruiting a mechanic?
Nik Kellingley wrote: ‘So let me spell it out about how a large number of trainers of my acquaintance feel about the CITP and the CIPD – it’s a badly thought out basic course which is both overpriced and lacking in content (that’s the CITP done with)’.
It is worth noting that CIPD don’t set the price, the delivers do, so they can hardly be held responsible for that unless you think price fixing should be introduced? I presume providers set a price that the market will bare, like any other product being offered for sale. Is it badly thought out? Well I see it being aimed at new trainers who are setting out to develop their skills and abilities in this field. The following url details the coverage of this programme: http://www.cipd.co.uk/mandq/standards/support/ctp.htm
Nik Kellingley continued: ‘and as for the CIPD there is much agreement which with a slightly better search of training zone you would have found (try clicking on my name and checking some of the threads regarding training qualifications and people wanting to get a start in training) that shows even chartered status trainers feel that the CIPD is a body which does not represent the profession. But is in fact geared entirely to HR professionals (for whom, admittedly it does a darned good job) and treats training professionals as ugly sisters (or brothers) with a badly thought out framework which is geared around training as a secondary function to HR. Which it is not.’
With this sentiment I concur.
Nik Kellingley concluded: ‘And finally, I suspect Juliet has the right of it all when she says there is no substitute for experience.’
Yes, which if you haven’t got makes it particularly difficult to get your foot in the door. And that I suspect is where a decent qualification comes in and is why some employers ask for them.
Without quotes
Now I’m confused – we start with one assertion in defence of the CITP (after Juliet’s posting) along the lines of all my IT trainers have the CITP.
And then we have Gary saying that technical trainers don’t need the CITP.
So I’ll admit to being downright confused by those in the defence of the CITP.
A technical trainer is someone who trains in a technical subject (usually IT) rather than someone who is technically a trainer but in fact does another job.
So… if the CITP is the masterclass for the would be trainer, why would a technical trainer not need this qualification?
Because it’s quite clearly not a masterclass for the would be trainer.
And as for price fixing – yes there should be price fixing – the “free market” does not work in favour of the consumer (easy example here – go to Tesco or any other supermarket and work out how much of your money actually goes to the people who make the goods you buy – it’s not very much, you can ask any farmer. So where does it go? Not in to your pocket that’s for sure.)
And if the CIPD actually gave a damn about quality control on “their” course then they would ensure that your investment was value for money – which they don’t.
So it’s nice to hear that someone with a vested interest in the CITP being sold is lecturing me on the value of it. Note here that I have no vested interest in any train the trainer course as I don’t sell or buy them.
What I can tell you is that there are many options and endlessly banging the CITP drum doesn’t make it any more attractive to the listener.
My advice was simple and still is – work out what you’re going to do and then buy a course that suits you.
Unlike the proponents of the CITP here who are trying to flog their dead horse in a “one size fits all” manner – despite the fact the horse is still dead.
Now if they’d paid any attention on their CITP courses the first thing everyone is encouraged to do on the course is… a training needs analysis to identify a training need before finding a solution. Which is my suggestion, that’s all.
Look further
http://www.cipd.co.uk/communities/discussions.htm?command=view&boardid=75&id=279
>>>I would suggest that if you want to find out which is the most recognised or most wanted qualification (which is probably more important) I would look at adverts for training roles, jobs and related functions>>>
Within the enormous CIPD debate on this issue above there used to be a survey of L&D adverts from People Management Magazine, it said that 69% of training jobs listed in PM did NOT require CTP (or CIPD membership) (2004). The guy did the same survey a year later (2005)and 72% of L&D adverts DIDNT require it. People Management is the CIPD’s own magazine.
>>>Frankly I’m not bothered which qualification you go for, but I’d rather you made an informed choice based on some real research rather than be influenced by people like me or some else who are either pro or anti CIPD or what ever.>>>
I agree and would certainly investigate more than one survey on the subject.
>>>Roughly half of relevant job advertisers it would appear seem to specify the qualification they prefer or desire and the Certificate in Training Practice most certainly features there>>>
I kind of agree, but the real question is to what degree is the CTP required? It is not the most prevalent. What has happened instead is that the CIPD or employers have done a very good job at confusing the qualification with the professional membership.
Leaving that aside though…
Now that you dont need any qualification at all to become an affiliate of the CIPD and given that the debate about the worth of qualifications the question arising (as a trainer) is why bother?
May I venture to suggest we retire for lunch m’lud?
A further comment
“My advice was simple and still is – work out what you’re going to do and then buy a course that suits you.”
Nik – you’re absolutely right here – and none of the posters here have disputed that. What we are disputing is the idea that the CIPD’s CTP has no value. I’ve gained 7 qualifications in L&D and psychometrics over the years. None of them have been a substitute for experience but they do at least demonstrate threshold competence – hence the reasons that some employers like L&D professionals to have a qualification. As you say, it’s finding the right qualification for you that’s important.
The qualifications that were most useful to me where not the ones that reinforced my experience but those that taught me something new – or in the case with one certification programme – made me unlearn a great deal.
I do believe the CIPD has value across the training disciplines including technical training (and I’ve been a technical trainer myself). However, as you say, it may not be right for the individual. Personally, for technical trainers who want to be able to demonstrate sound delivery skills but don’t want to go through the broader CIPD CTP programme (which can take a lot of time and money) I would recommend CTT+. It’s not only a first class qualification but it’s recognised globally by the likes of Microsoft and Oracle.
I have no vested interest in promoting any particular qualification. I do however value becoming professionally qualified in this profession and the CIPDs CTP is something I’ve considered favourably when recruiting.
Horses, courses, etc
Damien – what an interesting exchange you seem to have sparked off!!
Some questions of my own might help?
Which “training industry” do you refer to? Training fork truck drivers? Airline pilots? Double galzing salespeople? Management skills? IT? First Aid?
Is your focus purely on delivery of training, or are you looking to include the broader aspects associated with some kind of training consultancy, for example needs analysis, linkage to organisational objectives, use of various design methods, evaluation, assessment etc? If your focus is purely on delivery then something like the Trainer Assessment Programme module on delivery skills (from The Training Foundation – no interest but I have just completed this module in order to ‘road test’ their offering – I think it is very good by the way) which is good for PC or IT training as well as certain kinds of soft-skills delivery too. There’s also various providers of accelerated learning methods, and then there are also courses on coaching, facilitation, small group work, large group work (try Open Space technology here), and eLearning.
I am not too familiar with the CTP content now, but I certainly got a lot out of the CTP approach AND the TAP approach too. They are different horses for different courses.
Depending upon the ‘training industry’ there will likely be different standards or different ‘most recognised’ qualifications. I suspect however that something like the CTP coupled with a good delivery skills qualification, will stand you in very good stead as you get started. After that, it’s down to experience and track record.
I have no research to point to, only my own experiences and opinions.
If cash is an issue in the first instance and ‘speed to market’ is critical, let me suggest you spend the money on getting delivery skills qualifications – the CTP won’t necessarily cover it for a while, and I can’t vouch for the depth and breadth of this aspect. With the delivery skills option (i.e. TAP) you pick up some key skills right away. If you need to get some kind of handle on other aspects of the training process, buy some books! There’s stacks on this forum and others on evaluation, coaching, needs analysis etc. There’s stacks on the web too. Paul Kearns, via Fenman, published in Training Journal magazine an excellent 12 part series that will provide good background material and some useful tools.
Good luck.
Martin
Still With Quotes
Nik Kellingley wrote: “~ And then we have Gary saying that technical trainers don’t need the CITP. So I’ll admit to being downright confused by those in the defence of the CITP. A technical trainer is someone who trains in a technical subject (usually IT) rather than someone who is technically a trainer but in fact does another job.”
This is not quite what I said; I asked the question do Technical trainers need the CiTP qualification? And that if my interpretation of that job function is correct which it appears it is then I wondered if that qualification was entirely relevant.
Nik Kellingley continued: “So… if the CITP is the masterclass for the would be trainer, why would a technical trainer not need this qualification? Because it’s quite clearly not a masterclass for the would be trainer.”
I don’t view the CiTP as a Masterclass, it is however as CIPD state a foundation programme.
Nik Kellingley continued: “And as for price fixing – yes there should be price fixing – the “free market” does not work in favour of the consumer (easy example here – go to Tesco ~ And if the CIPD actually gave a damn about quality control on “their” course then they would ensure that your investment was value for money – which they don’t. So it’s nice to hear that someone with a vested interest in the CITP being sold is lecturing me on the value of it.”
Price fixing in the UK economy is illegal. http://urlsnip.com/290111 The only person who can determine value for money would be the end user, surely? They could of course achieve this by undertaking a projective ROI exercise to consider this issue and then on conclusion an ROI. If the CiTP is not a sound investment then don’t use it. Some organisations do find it of immense value, other do not. I’m not sure that I would call an 86 word paragraph referencing price fixing as lecturing, but – ?
Nik Kellingley concluded: What I can tell you is that there are many options and endlessly banging the CITP drum doesn’t make it any more attractive to the listener. My advice was simple and still is – work out what you’re going to do and then buy a course that suits you. Unlike the proponents of the CITP here who are trying to flog their dead horse in a “one size fits all” manner – despite the fact the horse is still dead. Now if they’d paid any attention on their CITP courses the first thing everyone is encouraged to do on the course is… a training needs analysis to identify a training need before finding a solution. Which is my suggestion, that’s all.”
The latter part of this paragraph is good advice; an ITN is a vital first step in any form of training intervention. If your organisation is seeking to develop you into a Trainer with a good grasp of the entire systematic training cycle the CiTP might be one way forward for you. If this is not what you need, then it won’t meet your requirements. One size does not fit all, but it does fit some.
Bare Facts
Attending CTP made me a better all-round trainer when I’d just entered the field. It was a good opportunity to meet other trainers at a time when I’d had very little contact with the wider training world. It boosted my confidence and actually made me think about issues OTHER THAN delivery. Therefore this was beneficial and if it was purely on those grounds I would heartily recommend CITP.
Where it falls down is the ‘aftercare’ if you like. I find being a member of CIPD to be of no use at all, with the organisation being so purely focused on (let’s call a spade a spade) personnel. Even in my final ‘interview’ for CTP the CIPD assessor seemed to have no grasp of training and seemed more concerned with personnel issues.
The final point that concerns me is that too many people in these debates seem to treat any of these qualifications as a marketing tool. Surely a good trainer is a good trainer irrespective of bits of paper and initials after their name. It all smacks of many organisations approach to IIP. That damned wreath on the bottom of a piece of paper seems way more important than any benefits to staff.
Arrrrrgh
Hi folks,
It seems once again that qualification seems to be taken with greater emphasis than down right good old fashioned experience knowledge and ability. In my industry of H & S training, very few people seem to be qualified in a training role.
It is a very daunting task to stand up in front of a group of people you don’t know and in a sense entertain them for the length of time you have them.
This only comes with experience and in my mind training quals do not provide this, or technical knowledge on a specific subject.
I have seen so many times that qualified people (and I have to say i have come across many)have this idea that once qualified in one subject, they can train any.
The other problem is they tend to be very rigid in their approach.Thus flexibility is lost and therefore the trainees have lost.
The best training I have found is allowing a potential trainer to sit in on courses given by an experienced perso. Then allow them to assist in certain parts of a course. Thus building confidence in themselves and the knowledge they have.
It is with this in mind that basic subject knowledge and experience is all I look for from my trainers. Common sense has to prevail. I am successfull in the way I work and have in the last 10 years recieved only two compaints regarding the training given. One of these in fact was down to the client who did not want their staff to know what they were legally bound to recieve and blamed an influx of PPE claims on us.
So my stance is and shall always be, quality comes with experience and subject knowledge not teacher / trainer quals.
Don’t get me wrong,training qualifications have their place, however I feel that you should look beyond this point.
All the best
Chris
TAP
Having recently completed the full TAP (Trainer Accreditation Programme) Diploma from The Training Foundation I can say that I found it incredibly rewarding and invaluable to me in my job as a technical trainer. My job role involves training delegates on processes, financial products as well as IT systems and previously involved me simply drawing on my experience within the industry. Working towards my TAP qualification has helped me to put that experience and knowledge into a workable format which has lead to vastly improved candidate assessment scores and retention of information. I would have no hesitation in recommending this course to anyone.
A totally different tack
All comments so far have been about qualifications that are attached to courses that lead to the said qualifications. How about considering looking at qualifications that are independent of any courses – especially if the person concerned has existing training delivery experience. Objective criteria for training delivery skill can be obtained from the Institute of IT Training – which accredits a number of qualification routes. Qualification should be seen as independent of the route taken by an individual towards gaining knowledge, skill and experience in their chosen field. Any further questions – just ask.
(I am an IITT assessor).
Arian Associates Ltd
Lots of different opinions about this question. You seem to have opened a can of worms somewhat.
You don’t state in which subject area you are looking to operate.
My advice would be to look at organisations that are specifically aimed at training qualifications in your chosen field or if you are looking for general training quals, then loook at either CIPD or the Institute of Training & Occupational Learning (ITOL) – both of these will give you food for thought.
Ignorance isn’t bliss it’s ignorance!
OK I admit I did the CTP infact I did it in 15 weeks, also I did it after completing the first year of the CIPD Professional level. I don’t know why people are going on about the tame the trainer (sorry I mean train the trainer) courses because frankly I have seen monkeys do better. Why all this anti CIPD feeling? most who have posted here have missed the fact that their are four learning and development electives in the CIPD Professional Development Scheme (and successfully completing just this stage can also get you Edexcel Advance Diploma in Learning & Development). THE CTP is a nuts and bolts course and frankly if you can’t manage this this then you shouldn’t be training at all. The Learning & Development electives are a natural progression for anybody who is serious in this field, it demands that you are able to apply strategy to your working, how anyone thinks they can progress to a management level and beyond without this is beyond me.
Still when that plum job comes up I will be head and shoulders way above those that don’t have comparable qualifications and exposure/experience that they have already given me.
Could have, Would have, Should have are words of a fool.
Don’t settle for 2nd best…
I recently completed my CTP and knowing no better can say that I thoroughly enjoyed it and have found it invaluable! I currently don’t work in training and getting a job in this field is difiicult enough without some sort of qualification wherever that may come from! So for those who don’t have the opportunity to sit in and watch experienced trainers at work, starting with CTP to me was a great first foothold. I enjoyed the hands on approach of the course, it helped boost my confidence in my own abilities and the skills afforded me by the training have been very useful in moulding my current role to more of what I would like to do in the future. I could rave about my experience all day to be honest but there are a couple of defining elements in what you get out of any training – firstly what you put in (the most obvious but often overlooked as your commitment to your own development is crucial) and finally the trainer training you! My CTP experience could have been disastrously different – our first ‘lecturer’ was disengaged and the whole group lacked faith in her abilities, several students actually left! She was swiftly replaced with an inspirational trainer who succeeded in developing a bunch of ordinary people into confident would-be trainers! My piece of advice is, “if you’re not happy with what you’re getting – don’t settle for it!” You owe it to yourself.
Having just done my CiTP last year…
… I have to totally disagree about it being a good experience. Yes, it gave me a grounding in the background tasks, and if I ever had any questions about how training fits into an HR Strategy, well that was answered. However, if you want to learn how to deliver training – steer clear. It is extremely expensive for what it is, and I find that being a member of the CIPD is of little use to a trainer (so much so I didnt renew it). For me, the CIPD is too involved with HR and views training as an inconvenient but necessary add on.
The only benefit I found to the course was that it put me in close contact with other professionals in the field – who gave me far more information with regards to being a trainer than I learnt on the course.
The reason I chose the CiTP was a number of employers were recommending the course. On reflection, a TAP course might have been more beneficial, but
I find that it doesnt matter which piece of paper you get, so long as you have one in your arsenal.
I would definitely look into any course you want to do closely. If you can get the views of the previous year, I would. No matter how bad or good a course is, it relies totally on the person who delivers it to make or break the experience. And who better to tell you than last year’s guinea pigs.
Boy oh boy!
Ha ha! Cano’worms, bit of spite, this read makes a good read!!
Step 1:
Who are you?
What are you?
Where are you coming from?
Where are you going?
Why are you going there?
When do you want to get there?
What do you know about training?
How much training experience do you have?
What are your needs?
Do you need your ego cajoled by the letters at the end of your name?
Step 2:
What is your budget?
How much time do you have on your hands?
How much energy do you have?
What is available where you are?
I have 3 weeks till the end of my CTP and feel the £355 (don’t get me started on the price of the CIPD membership) have been worth every penny. I am an ex teacher, so the getting up in front of people, planning, etc was no news to me, but the course has allowed me to put my common sense, experience and skills to good use and to further my knowledge in specific areas highlighted on the course, or parts I decided to investigate for given assignments. Some people on the CTP with me were scared stiff at the idea of doing these things that only get me a little bit of stage fright. They are now contemplating getting better jobs, being in the face of their employers who made them sign up to keep their existing jobs, asking for larger parts in our group presentations because they have gained confidence, and simply enjoying themselves. It’s “only” and NVQ level 3, but if all you need to get going and to put your prior knowledge and experience in neat little boxes labelled with the appropriate jargon so you can get the job you want, seems to me it’s worth getting on a course which meets your needs.
It’s not rocket science, it’s an opportunity to learn new things, to meet like minded people, to network and for me, to get a firmer grip on my employer’s short and curlies… priceless!
Have fun learning, however you do it.
Elsa BEPC, BAC A2, BTS CI, L LLCE, PGCE, and soon to add CTP. Ha! How’s that for a pompus signature? Ego about to burst 🙂
TAP has been useful for me
Hi Damien,
What a row going on below! I’d just like to say that I have completed the TAP qualification and have found it to be extremely useful and practical and I believe would be beneficial to you in whatever field of training you are aiming for. Experience does count but assuming you don’t have any as yet then some kind of qualification is essential.
If you would like to ask me about TAP (without debate!) please feel free to drop me a line.
C&G
I did a C&G 7302 Teaching Adults to get my ‘foot in the door’. It was 3 months part time, one morning a week. I found it really useful.
best course
From my biased point of view C&G 7307 smokes all the others.
CIPD -Training?
Since the original ‘training’ and ‘human resources’ institutes joined to form what is now the CIPD, training has become less and less relevant to the resulting organisation. Although I am still clinging onto my fellowship of the CIPD (I guess the letters still carry some weight?), it has been almost completely hijacked by HR and is, in practice, hardly relevant to the training professional.