Being a long-term user of Google for first insight, here are several insights on the difference between training and education. Personally, I find education to be much more formal than training, although I’ve found that education includes training, and that training sometimes needs to digress into education.
For example, I earned my Master of Science in Systems Engineering (MSSE) for Florida Institute of Technology (FIT) 12 years ago when it dealt with hardware. Recently however, I sought to seek a PhD in Systems Engineering from FIT and found that they’ve imposed a 7-year statute of limitation on transitioning from a master’s degree to its related PhD.
I’ve always believed that technologies continuously and some more frequently than others obsolete themselves by their own evolution. I never considered that this belief also applied to technologies academics. I look around where I work and, indeed, I find that more Systems Engineers are now found in the software departments than in the hardware departments.
So I am now stepping back and enrolled in core software courses at the associate’s level, to be followed by core software courses at the bachelor’s level from the Eastern Florida State College so that I may then return to FIT to take core software courses at the master’s level to renew my obsolete MSSE to their new MBSE – yes, Systems Engineering has become a business instead of a science!
So my case is an example of software training digressing into education. I view my software training as essential for eventually arguing in favor of transitioning from flat screen displays to 3D augmented reality (AR) spatial display output, and transitioning from mice and keyboards to conversable databases for input once I’ve earned my PhD in Systems Engineering.
I’ll also help “train” fellow engineers in digital twin projection for both 3D printed components and robotic manufacturing and logistics support for AR visual overly operation and maintenance of what’s manufactured.
And if I ever retire from Aerospace, maybe I’ll seek employment at FIT to formally “educate” students in digital twin databases as a single source of absolutely all information for a given system (aircraft, ship, automobile, etc.), be it component sources, expenses, management, tooling, personnel, etc., where currently we expensively have separate and fragmented databases for departmentalized copies of the digital twin (design).
Here’s that Google link:
VAL VONHEEDER | Principal Engineer
Northrop Grumman Corporation | Aerospace Systems
O: 321-726-7972 | val.vonheeder@…
I think you’ve added a third term — academia — to the discussion. The experience you have with pursing and advanced degree resonates with my experience. Even organizations that espouse their belief that they should be learning inclusive tend to believe that knowledge fades with time. I hate to tell folks this but calculus is still calculus. It truly hasn’t changed that much in over a hundred years. Yea, we can do things more quickly and we can use principles for encryption — but it’s not fundamentally different.
I think the crux of the conversation that @Lorne Rogers and I were having is the types of experiences that people have and which ones are education vs. training … and how that intersects with learning. For me, I don’t really care whether someone learns something or not. It’s not important to me. What’s important to me is performance. Can they do their job? Can they access — internally or externally — the information they need when they need it.
I’ve got a few hundred book reviews on my blog now. I’ve got a Kindle library with hundreds of books that I can get in a few moments, activate search, and locate the specific reference I need. Why in the world would I memorize that? Conversely, I manually set styles every day in Word. I know that Ctrl-Shift-S activates the styles dialog. I know what I need, and I access what I need. That for me is the heart of education. It’s Bloom’s taxonomy — but without the belief that everyone should climb the pyramid.
Thor Projects LLC
When I think of education, I see and believe it to be more than just training. To me it means that someone has a broader knowledge and has the ability to learn, think, reason and extrapolate. While training is much narrower and doesn’t necessarily involving thinking. Dictionary definitions are Education: 1a : the action or process of educating or of being educated also : a stage of such a process. b : the knowledge and development resulting from the process of being educated a person of little education. Training: the process of learning the skills you need to do a particular job or activity.
Educated workers are more valuable than trained workers because they can offer more than just completing a rote task.
Mary Margaret Allegro
American Society of Civil Engineers
Another facet of education and training is that the breadth of education often evolves and eventually narrows to training.
Long ago map making was a highly educated skill, and trusting maps more to the educated. Many of us used to be very good map-folders, to avoid blocking a driver’s vision. Now, so much later, we relegate all that to GPS guidance that needs very little training to use it.
Television antenna skills also soon reduced to handheld controllers, which are now reducing more so to digital assistants.
Microsoft Hololens and competitors augmented reality are now using accurate overlays to accomplish operation and maintenance that previously required a lot of education and credentialing to accomplish both.
Education as well as training are both observably fluid in required effort.
Socrates was worried about what books would do to our minds. I don’t know anyone who would say books were a bad thing. Hardly anyone remembers phone numbers any longer — it’s too easy to rely on our phones.
I think that we need to remember that education is in service towards a goal. That goal — in a business context — are things like productivity, innovation, and quality.
The examples you gave are skills that are no longer necessary in the general sense. However, there are still reasons why people need them. I still pull out some RS-232 serial communications skills from time-to-time. They’re no longer useful in the daily sense.
Thor Projects LLC
Our learning needs have definitely changed over time. From one time of training which was sufficient for a long and productive life to continuous learning as change is around us. In particular on records management. Looking back how Napoleon Bonaparte institutionalized ‘record keeping’ in France and countries conquered in and around 1800 century, I don’t think much of the principles has changed until the 1980/90s. Digital tools and solutions have been disruptive for many professions and entering machine learning and artificial intelligence in record and document management requires understanding how it can be applied in the digital workplace. I was triggered and surprised by a survey recently published by lloyds bank in the UK with the misleading title of consumer digital index. Misleading because it is about an essential part of document management, that shows that ” More than half of UK employees (53%) do not have the digital skills needed for work. That means also the skills or competencies to work with document management systems, I assume. Here is a need for change management approaches and capacities to explain more clearly to staff how to utilize todays tools e.g. record managers are becoming trainers and learners as well to stay abreast of tomorrow workforce.
Daan makes a good point about disruptive changes impacting the way we work. I myself went into the workforce when electronics was slowly shifting from analog to digital.
US Naval Air trained me in analog electronics and gave me an easy entrance into civilian work at Hewlett Packard. I worked final test on their magnetic tape drives, both analog (IRIG) 15/16 ips to 120 ips, and digital drives with vacuum chamber tape speed buffering. There I learned octal and hexadecimal numbering, and saw HP’s initiation of its clever HP-35 pocket scientific calculator priced at $350. Now marketing promoters give away pocket calculators.
I tried picking up programming at college back then, hole-punching card decks to submit to the one computer on campus, an IBM 360 used by hundreds of programming students, where we waited for hours for a ratchet-edge paper output of our programming, just to re-punch our errors and resubmit our decks only to wait again for our printouts. I soon quit programming.
Years later, now, I’m back at college learning C++ on my home laptop computer attending class without a classroom. At work, we’re now surrounded by multiple flat screens for personal computers that desk phones are plugged into, that we couldn’t even comprehend back then. And my younger coworkers are wondering why I’m studying old C++ instead of Python!
Now we’re on the cusp of spatial imaging for output and conversable databases for input, while kids in school will soon look upon our digital workplace as ancient. Just like us looking back at our old analog technologies as ancient, and not comprehending .
Just about every industry has similar histories of education trending to workplace training, over again and again, while we currently can’t comprehend spatial imaging and conversable databases.
As science fiction writer Arthur C. Clark once bemoaned, the future is not what it used to be!
Hang in there, Daan!
VAL VONHEEDER | Principal Engineer
Northrop Grumman Corporation | Aerospace Systems
Which is pretty much inline with my ‘definition’ or view. As I said to Rob, whether you see training as a subset of education (Rob’s way of looking at it), or as 2 complimentary parts of a whole (my view), there exists some differences. For me that difference manifests as education including the “why” factor, where training is mostly focused on the “how”.