Do students learn any thing?

[Alasdair]

in my honest opinion i dont think students learn anything at college, i done an NQ tree surgery course at kilmarnock college last year and to be quite honest, the only thing that the course done for me was help me pass my Nptc units, i did not pass my course as there was a big project to do which was worth half the course and thats what i failed on, i passed all my other units and tests but in the end i never passed my course.

 

Since finishing my course ive had 1 job which was on the railway and its not the best way to learn, and im struggling to find a company thats willing to spend a bit of time bringing me up to specs and the other problem is the area i live in, dont get me wrong theres plenty of companies around that area but its just tyring to find the 1 thats willing to give me a chance,

 

i gained cs 30, 31, 38, 39 and my first aid course, which is a great start but i have no real experience of working in the real world, in order to gain some experience of each and every ticket i think the colleges should do work experience for the students, i tried to get a job before and while at college but i was unable and im still struggling just now.

 

Dont get me wrong the course i done was i think a good course it had a wide viarity of stuff in it but some if not a large percentage of it is totally useless unless i work for myself which im not happy doing due to my lack of experience.

[John Hancock]

I started my three year apprenticeship in September 1985.

24years on, I'm still in the same job and taking on an apprentice next month.

 

The cycle continues.................

 

.

 

Well done David!

 

I think employers, working together with local colleges will prove invaluable in the future. A work based apprenticeship would give a far better, and safer (IMO) grounding for youngsters coming into our industry. As I understand there have been many accidents involving ‘newly qualified Arborists’ that have taken the fast-track route into our industry. Maybe a work-based aptitude would help prevent these?

 

I’m also pushing the local colleges to introduce C1 + E into their syllabuses, which would also be invaluable.

[combined tree services]

i went to merrist wood for ten weeks and learnt a massive amount more in ten weeks than i had in the 3 years that i had already been working in the trade . Not only did i learn alot of newer practical techniques but i gained a wealth of knowledge in the theory side of the job too . i feel that the course was well worth it . however i have since worked with a couple guys that have recently done the ten week course at Merrist Wood and it seems that the standards have dropped dramaticly .

 

i do feel that an aprenticeship is the better route to go down if you have someone as a mentor that has the kind of experiance and knowlege of someone like bob skyhuc , but no god to if you end up working with a small one man band that will not let you progress .

 

p.s sorry about the gramer and spelling - something i did not learn at college lol

[defenderjack]

hi guys im new on here so hello everyone !

ive just completed a 4 month intense course at plumpton college (SUSSEX)

its cost me the best part of 2500 quid because im 27 and dont qualify for any help plus funding 4 monthes of not working which has really taken its toll . ive now completed the course a month ago and have all my units cs 30 ,30.2 ,cs31 aerial rescue cs 39 chipper and mewp , the course was fantastic and had money permitted i would have done it a few years ago great bunch of guys and pretty much everyone works really hard .

 

From my experience and from what the teachers say the short courses produce more competent workers than the two year nd courses (im not saying that applies to everyone doing those cousrses so please dont take affence ) several reasons for that are we are climbing pretty much everyday and are able to tackle our own trees all day long without having to share saws and wait turns like guys on the 2 year ones , the amount of practical experience is second to none and would definatly reccomend it !

[Marc]

There are lots of ways to get into this industry, i myself just started out as a self employed labourer back in late 2006 dragging brush, handling lowering lines, hedgecutting, fetching coffee,,,, general dogs body or stick bitch.

 

I thought about doing an intensive course it was just the cost no way could i afford it, so i just worked away when ever i had spare cash i put myself through a unit or bought kit, every weekend i could i got into a tree and practiced moving about the crown, i found forums like this one and would follow discussions, look at pictures and ask stupid questionsn.

Every oppertunity I had to climb or fell something i would throw myself at often going past my comfort zone.

 

It was hard over the last 3 years i've worked at over 12 companies in the quest to push myself to get every climbing oppertunity i could and learn through watching/observing others.

 

I've found it a satisfying experience to progress my career from stick bitch to freelance climber myself, for me i want to be the best treeworker I can once i've achieved that i'll progress my knowledge further on tree biology, although the vast majority of my work is safety and tree health orientated already. I personally can't see how you can learn about the structure of trees and how they respond untill you've had the practical hands on experience getting close and personal with trees.

 

In short I can see college has its place, only tree work is an intensly practical profession the class room is no substitute for hands on experience.

[Will Ayers]

i think those people that push themselves through a course and come out with good grades and practical abilities are as likely to succeed in a working environment, i think its the age old thing of horses for courses.

 

i think its easy to see a good worker a mile off. as said before if they are keen to get stuck in and ask loads of questions then that marks them above the rest.

 

i think there is a risk of people coming out of college with this idea that they know it all and are the big boys but when i finished my course this year our tutor told us that we were now successfully back at the bottom of the pile and any respect must be earnt.

 

as for wether courses are rubish, yes, some aspects are. that cant be helped as the courses are required to follow a syllabus that sometimes bares no relevance to the subject. that said i went to sparsholt and did the ND there and i think they tie in all of the subjects well with each other. i'm sure it could be better, but by the sounds of it sparsholt is one of the better colleges when it comes to producing good workers, but i would say that wouldn't i!

[Mark J]

I did an ND three years ago, I came from a totally different field so college let me explore my love of trees, find out all about them. The tutors I had had been in the game for a long time and knew their stuff. I learned a whole load about trees and techniques for working with them. What wasn't taught is the reality of hard graft. I think that's the difference. Some people want to work, some don't.

[Highland Forestry]

i went to merrist wood for ten weeks and learnt a massive amount more in ten weeks than i had in the 3 years that i had already been working in the trade . Not only did i learn alot of newer practical techniques but i gained a wealth of knowledge in the theory side of the job too . i feel that the course was well worth it . however i have since worked with a couple guys that have recently done the ten week course at Merrist Wood and it seems that the standards have dropped dramaticly .

 

i do feel that an aprenticeship is the better route to go down if you have someone as a mentor that has the kind of experiance and knowlege of someone like bob skyhuc , but no god to if you end up working with a small one man band that will not let you progress .

 

p.s sorry about the gramer and spelling - something i did not learn at college lol

 

 

I don't know when you did your course but I have now been through three blokes out of merrist wood and as far as I am concerned all the course did was fill their heads full of ****!

The boys I had came straight out of merrist wood after the 10wk course and thought they were 'arborists' ..... and they simply werent.

They had good knowledge of id, and some fungi etc but couldnt use a chainsaw to save thier life.

Aside from all of that, everyone...including the merrist wood graduates seem only to get CS30, 31, 38, 39 - in industry this is about as much use as a chocolate fireguard!

Ok, so you have your 30, 31, 38 and 39...... what can you legally do??

Cut trees/crosscut and fell anything less than 15' and do an aerial rescue and use a chainsaw from a rope and harness..... big deal...Where's the 32,33, 34, 35, 40, 41, chipper, mewp, PA1, PA6, FA etc?

 

None of us like all this health and safety/qualification world we live in, but it's the hoops we have to jump though in order to get on with it..

 

IMHO if you go onto these college courses and pay good money for them you should come out of it with ALL the tickets you need to work legally and professionaly in the industry. Instead what we have coming out is a bunch of half-qualified guys thinking thier the bollox.

The colleges give the guys the impression that it dosent matter how long it takes them to do a job as long as they do it safe, which is also a load of crap.. safety and efficiency go hand in hand.

 

 

rant over....

Edited August 18, 2009 by Highland Forestry

[Andy Clark]

Gents,

 

I've been reading this thread with a lot of interest, and the occasional sigh and chuckle.

 

I spent some time teaching Arb at our local Ag college, mostly teaching ND Arb and C&G PhaseII Arb (10 week course), and i hate to say it but perhaps the biggest cause of everything that you've already covered in the thread is politics.

 

The politics of teaching.

 

Iniially, you'd think that those were two words that shouldn't be used together in the same sentence, but that's pure and simply what it boils down to.

 

Take the ND Arb that I taught for example.... The college prospectus listed a nice long and in depth section on "career options" following successfull completion... Tree Officer, Surveyor, "Arborist", ... all your middle of the road kind of management jobs that fit in between the roles of Climber and Consultant.

 

BUT, when it came down to it, the course itself was not an ND ARB.... it was ND HORT with Arb units!!! There's a HUUUUUUUGE difference!!

 

But then what were the Arb units that were included?? Tree Ident, Tree planting and after care, Tree Climbing, and tree felling. Hardly enough in terms of knowledge, to get most people through the door of a contractor and get a groundsman job, let alone on the road to becoming a tree officer!!

 

So, why does this happen..... well, the qualification itself is made up of units or modules. And colleges are allowed to pick and choose which of those units are taught, as long as enough teaching hours are covered to meet the qualification sylabus.

 

BUT (again), colleges can (and do) only teach those units, that can be taught within their funding and resource constraints. Therefore, rather than choosing to teach the most relevant units for the usefull and relevant outcome of the qual (ie, what the relevant industry dictates), they teach the ones that are cheapest and easiest to resource..... basic business sense really.

 

 

And as for the C&G phaseII... well, that's a whole other matter.

 

The C&G PhaseII (or 10 week tree surgery course as it is sometimes called), was originally intended for people that already had experience within the industry, but wanted an academic qual to back up their knowledge level. Ie, they already knew "how", but wanted a qual that touched the subject of "why".

 

BUT (there's another one), this is not how some colleges are running the course nowadays..... Now, it is being used more as an "Intro to Arb" course, with students coming from all walks of life and of all ages... to learn how to become "a tree surgeon".

 

To top it off, my old place used to run it as a one day per week for the entire academic year, rather than 10 back to back weeks.

 

Sorry, but it simply don't work like that. You CANNOT take a green as grass, 40 year old ex postman, and teach him to be a climber/tree surgeon/arborist in what basically amounts to 34 ish days!! I mean, no disrespect to anyone on this site what-so-ever, but unless you naturally "have the gift", it just ain't gonna happen!

 

 

So lets go back to what i mentioned earlier.... Business sense... Highest possible income, for the lowest possible outlay.

 

A college, may well be expected to be a place of academic learning, but it is also run and managed just the same as any other business.

 

And what is the usefull and most productive aspect of a college as a business??

 

Bums on seats!

 

That, gentlemen, is what the majority of lecturers in this country, be it Arb or otherwise, are forced to focus on..... in just the same way, that climbers are expected to climb as many trees as they can in a day, or groundsmen are expected to drag the most amount of brash they can....

 

Lecturers are there to make money, by getting bums on seats.

 

Needless to say, i resigned after one term!

[Andy Clark]

Someone within the thread earlier on mentioned Merrist Wood, and i just wanted to add something to that point.

 

I hate to say it, but I think it's more a case of the modern business mentality and expectation, rather than of any particular college.

 

For example, i was at M/Wood back in 94/95 studying the NCH (Arb)....

 

Once opon a time, that particular qual at that particular college, was revered around the world, as THE dogs dangly bits in terms of arb qualifications. I mean, i studied with people from Australia, N/Z, Sweden, Gerany.... all coming to a little Surry college to study a one year Arb course.

 

Where has that gone??

 

More to the point, WHY has it gone??

 

Take that example, and then add the point that someone else raised, regarding students coming outta collage with NPTC certs...

 

Again, that never used to happen!!

 

Colleges have the opportunity to teach what are called "secondary learning goals"... basically, a qual within a qual.

 

Back in the day, that used to be used to teach the accompanying NPTC certs... i came outta M/Wood with an NCH (Arb), plus the NPTC's to back it up (the old "Blue Book" of units 19/20/21)....

 

So why does that not happen now??

 

Most NPTC assessors are now independent, as they can make more money than what colleges pay their lecturers.... so, in order to offer the NPTCs as a secondary learning goal, they either have to pay for the lecturer to become an NPTC instructor/assessor (and run the risk that the lecturer is gonna leave cos he/she can make more money as an independent), or hire in an outsourced Instructor/assessor.

 

Add that to the business sense aspect (bums on seats mentality), and the finance/resource limitation aspect of my earlier post, and what do you have??

 

Gentlemen..... welcome to the "politics of teaching".