TrainerBase, the discussion forum for freelance and employed trainers and technical instructors, providing help with your career.
TrainerBase - helping trainers find business and business find trainers
Welcome, Login


Welcome to the TrainerBase Open Discussion Forum.

This page provides the opportunity (subject to permission being granted) for registered users of the TrainerBase to post messages for help, advice and general dialogue. Users are reminded not to post messages that are or may be perceived to be recruitment ads. The Opportunities section is where these can be posted for free. Also this forum is not the place for technical support or service queries. These should be made direct to info[at]

Do remember that this forum is visible to all visitors to the site. If you need to discuss something in private; you need to be a member of the TrainerBase and post messages in the Members' Forum. Messages posted on this forum are automatically tweeted. Click to


- Viewing thread: RE: Training is not a profession; discuss.,
- Return to Forum.

Message 5 of 9: Mac Macdonald on 29/01/2013
What a great topic Peter.

I am a huge fan of interactive delivery and engaging learners etc. I also deliver PTLLS and CTLLS through 2 Awarding Bodies and with these and other qualifications in training, I too wonder about what a "Professional" trainer really is and what a new trainer would have to do/achieve to gain the title of “Professional”? Perhaps you could ask a similar question on how each of us define a "Professional" trainer or what we see as the difference between a trainer and a professional trainer?

I appreciate the extract from Wikipedia, of “structure and rigour”, but I can’t help but wonder if this is official structure and rigour, as prescribed by the powers that be (educational bodies), or could this be such elements as implemented by trainers, designers organisations and so on?

I like your example where you say “And just thinking about it, I designed and built my own house but am not an architect ”. When I read that sentence my first thought was “wow that is impressive”; my second thought was “does that mean that you are a professional house builder”? I have a voice in my head (don’t be alarmed) saying that if someone classes themselves as a professional, I would expect/want them to be competent at what they do. I would want them to have a recognised qualification to make me feel that they have been officially measured at what they do and be professional in their approach communication etc. (Just can’t get away from that word professional can we)!

At the risk of touching a nerve with some, I have real concerns at what is deemed "correct" by some bodies. I therefore wonder just how effective a trainer deemed professional by that body really is. I wonder if at times we focus too much on the theoretical/academic aspect of training and not enough on the stand and deliver hands on skills. I can’t help thinking that some people involved in the design of qualifications are possibly constrained by their own academic experiences and focus too much on the theoretical work and evidence.

I manage the development of a global training product called TPMA, we insist a trainer must recertify every 3 years to renew their TPMA Trainer Certificate and TPMA Assessors must recertify their TPMA Assessors certificate every 2 years. This is to ensure that both trainers and assessors maintain their Skills. Given my earlier reference to SKU (Skills Knowledge and Understanding), I am conscious that for renewals there is a lack measurement of Knowledge and Understanding at the renewal stage. That is now being addressed to ensure the trainer’s or the assessor’s SKU and certificates are current. This is part of what I personally see as being a professional trainer, renewing/refreshing our skills and not for our sake but for the learners we are ultimately responsible for.

I have had personal experience of a trainer holding a Cert Ed who delivered a training course so badly, I seriously thought it was some form of prank and that the memorable Jeremy Beadle was about to appear and say “gotcha”! The holding of a qualification does not always mean a trainer is professional or is competent. In its simplest term I believe it proves a competence met at the time it was tested (which may have been some time ago as was the case above).

I wonder what being a professional trainer means to other trainers.

(To Post a reply, you must be a registered user with forum permissions.)

Return to Top ^
Return to Forum | View Complete Thread

Post a Reply (Existing Members)

Username: - Your email address
Password: - Forgotten your password?
  Remember me:

>> Join TrainerBase

The messages posted here are the views of the individuals concerned and do not represent the views of TrainerBase. The TrainerBase cannot be held responsible for any misrepresentations made on this forum. The TrainerBase welcomes correspondence from individuals who have concerns regarding the content of messages posted and will, when notified, take measures to investigate and resolve any issues.

The above forum is permissions based. Members taking out a subscription after 01/01/2012 are eligible for permission (please email if you have not been granted). A user (non member) wishing to take part in discussion and dialogue (gain contributor permission) requires the sponsorship of one or more of the existing contributors. Gaining sponsorship does not guarantee permission. The decision as to whether to award permission rests with the operators of TrainerBase; TrainerBase Ltd. To enquire about permission to contribute to this forum please email info[at]

Messages posted on this forum are automatically tweeted. Click to