Lecture formats

["Geoff Hart (by way of \"Eric J. Ray\" <ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com>)" <ght -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA>]

Frank Taylor is <<...putting the finishing touches to the
preparations for [a] lecture series on a subject that is highly
relevant to our profession>> and wondered about the preferred length
and structure of the course.

My opinion is to design for three days, but with the option of
excerpting the material to produce a two-day course ***on request
only***. Why? Because two 8-hour days (16 hours) doesn't even come
close to equaling three 7-hour days (21 hours), and if the material
really requires three days, it simply won't work in two. Students
need time to absorb information before moving on to new concepts, and
cramming too much into a short period ensures that they won't learn
all they could. It would be far more effective to offer a condensed
version of the course in two days, covering a smaller range of
material or the same range, but in much less depth.

If you leave it to your clients to decide which format most suits
them, you'll attract more clients. For example: Personally, if the
course is on my own dime, I'll go for the 2-day course so I can fit
it into a weekend, thereby saving both the 35% on cost that you
mentioned (I'm on a tight budget these days) and two days of personal
leave. If the course is on company time and expense, then I want
three days so I can relax and explore the course in some depth. If I
were freelancing full-time and had a gap in my schedule to fill and
money to burn, I'd go for the three days. So depending on my
situation, you might lose me as a client if you rigidly stuck to one
of your two options.
--Geoff Hart @8^{)}
geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca

"Patience comes to those who wait."--Anon.


 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=