I agree totally with you, e-learning in effect means you don’t make contact and the people who set up the subject for e-learning are never openly stood there to be challenged on the why’s and where for’s of the subject, or confronted on occasion, their stupidity.
Some people don’t like being challenged in the ACO about their thought processes, as they are always ‘right’ hmmm no not always.
I tend to agree the lack of opportunity for course in the ATC is a major failing, but when they expect volunteers to do them.
My wife did a CP course with the LSCB and they seem to have far more CP courses than Wing offers and they are free for volunteers.
Well a good compromise seems to be how the Scouts have implemented their compulsory training. In person training and e-learning are both available to renew training, and it’s preferred that if you last renewed via e-learning, you next renew in person.
e-Learning denies you the chance to chat, mull over and generally digest the information. You can mug up and pass a test then forget it all three minutes later.
But don’t worry, us teachers will be made redundant by e-learning according to futurologists…
Whenever I tried to chat in class I found a board duster heading my way 
I am not saying it is ideal in all circumstances, but it is a balanced solution when taking into account all of the factors at play.
The trouble with e-learning is that the only confirmation it can provide is that the training was displayed on your screen for a certain period of time. It cannot confirm that any learning has taken place.
With regard to the H&S training, if the H&S hierarchy thinks this training is so important, they should invest their time in providing face to face training to the frontline operatives. I would appreciate that more than the box ticking pedentary they provide at the moment! (MT risk assessment a case in point!)
I got an email because I did an NCALT in under 5 minutes! 
That is the purpose of the embedded questions, either throughout or as a final assessment.
You cannot guarantee that the work is that of the intended student, but you can have them make a declaration to that effect.
Neither of these are in place for the latest HR training! It is just directions to a number of PowerPoints. So the only confirmation is that you have downloaded the PowerPoints, no way of confirming any learning has taken place!
A proper e-learning process involves a lot of work, time and programming knowledge. All of which costs a lot of money. If H&S is that important, it needs an investment in either a proper e-learning process or face to face training. Otherwise the training is insufficient!
This attitude towards training reinforces my opinion that H&S is a box ticking exercise to protect HQAC and the H&S section.
Which doesn’t mean it is dead as a concept - it just means they need to do better.
They will probably just be using ultilearn as a dumping ground for materials as they do for cadet training and not using it as an e-learning platform.
Preparing courses to run properly does require a bit of time and effort, but I would suggest it is time well spent. It also needs somebody competent guiding the whole process and the individual elements.
Tim, we have no place for your Common Sense here!
Reminds me of the faces of CCF Admin when a local Army CTT chap started to go in to how quick and easy payments were when demonstrating Westminster to the assembled at a recent area conference - Priceless!
I agree with the first part. The second part… I expect to see a Rainbow Unicorn before that happens!!
Is that not why they have wing training officers to run courses?
Please God no.
I can say that particular patch of grass ain’t greener…
Well that’ll depend on you’re experience and who delivered the training for you.
Personally I haven’t had any bad experiences of the scout training.
But anyway my point was the flexibility of having in person and e-learning training.
A fair point. The flexibility is good. But the e-learning is incomplete and the validation system, patchy. But then their system also relies on volunteers. We could certainly draw on ideas and good practice from outside the ATC to deliver training!
Take your general points but … if so … why you in ACO?
Analysis of that jokey comment is not relevant to the thread.
I don’t like people either. It’s just my default setting. A few are privileged enough to become “tolerated”.
But on topic, I’ve received instructor-led H&S and risk assessing training and you’ll find it more common among those who aren’t part of the “old and bold” - it’s part of their promotion matrix.
To me, it never hurts to refresh some of these things. The CD was never the gold standard, it was awareness. Further training courses delve into the detail more and focus on the specifics of the skills and requirements.
In a previous job, I did H&S, Manual handling, and COSHH e-learning. It was fine for bringing awareness to those things and empowering me to be able to consider what was good and bad (and then promptly choose to ignore it). But if I was going to take on any greater responsibility then further training would have been needed.
It strikes me as well, that many of those who take the attitude of “I’ve been doing this for years, I don’t need training” are the ones who cuck it up (talking generally, not purely H&S).