Technical Writer

It’s an old saying that those who can, do, while those who can’t, teach.

Teaching adults—whether it be at a tertiary institute or in the workplace—is different to teaching children.  Children are fed information, and the teacher checks to ensure that they have retained that information by homework, assignments and the like.  If the child has not learned what they need to know, the teacher takes remedial action to ensure they do learn.

It is different when that child goes on to tertiary studies, or when they learn at the workplace.

My writing partner recently started a professional writing degree at one of our local tertiary institutions.  She commented how the younger students straight from secondary school waited to be told what to do and how to do it, while the older ones took the initiative and did their own thing.

At the same time I was running training sessions at work, and we spent some time discussing the different teaching methods of a tertiary lecturer and the workplace trainer.

We decided that while there are some brilliant teachers out there, it’s actually more common to have poor teachers in tertiary education than it is to have them in the workforce.  In fact, many university lecturers would soon find themselves out of a job if they changed careers and became workplace trainers.

Why is that?

Note that I am talking about people who make a career out of training here, not the subject matter expert who is suddenly thrust into a training role with, “You know how to do this, show everyone else.”

First, though, let me define what I mean by a ‘bad’ teacher.  I mean someone who cannot impart information to others.  You may know a subject backwards, but if you cannot pass that knowledge on you are not a good teacher.

In the workplace the onus is on the trainer to produce a result—a trainee who knows how to carry out a specific task.  This is measurable.  If the trainee goes back to work and can carry out their task, then the trainer has done their job.  If large numbers of trainees come back from training still unable to carry out the task, the trainer is sacked.  Hence, in general, only the good (i.e. successful) trainers survive.

In the tertiary environment the onus is on the student to produce the result.  The student must prove that they have learned by passing exams or other set tasks. The lecturer passes on information but it is up to the student to retain it.

It’s not that university lecturers are necessarily bad teachers, nor do bad teachers teachers automatically gravitate to higher education. Like any other profession—including workplace training—they have their range of good, bad and occasionally brilliant teachers.  What they don’t have is a results-oriented workplace that reflects back on them, rather than the student, if the student does poorly.

Last Modified : June 1st, 2007
Filed under : Tech Writer
Navigate : Previous post / Next post