search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
TRAINING


Development of underpinning knowledge and understanding


A P L


Initial assessment Classroom training


Development of attitude and skills


A P L


e-learning Practical training


Workplace assessment of competence


Other theoretical learning


Workplace learning


Individual learning assessment plan/report


Record learning (log and report)


Record results


Record learning (log and report)


Learning management system Figure 1. Eastwood Park’s blended learning solution.


competent to the standards expected in their occupational area, whether derived from HTMs or other types of guidance or ‘standards’ they are working towards, via a generic blended learning model. This model is also a Competence- Based model that can be applied to individuals and groups of learners irrespective of their country of origin or location. It relies on the information gained from formative assessment activities to ‘steer’ the student through the learning processes to the outcome (competence) required. It is underpinned by a Learning Management System that records progress and achievements. Typically, we have students regularly


attend from The Middle East, Africa, South East and Central Asia, South America, and Europe.


Overseas delivery Sending delegates to the UK to attend a short course is not always possible, and can become very costly due to travel arrangements, VISA applications etc so we provide a service whereby we send a member of our staff to the relevant country to deliver training at an appropriate local site, which could be a hospital. Minimum delegate numbers apply to this approach, to ensure it is viable, and to be able to provide this service a number of checks have to be undertaken to make sure an appropriate learning environment is available with access to suitable and sufficient equipment for use during the practical element of the training. If we are able to deliver one or more of our existing scheduled courses in this way, we will also be able to provide the associated


IFHE DIGEST 2025 Re-audit/assess?


Evaluate training


Added value?


Accreditation Assess competence Workplace support Deliver training Figure 2. Eastwood Park’s international competence development model. 77


Audit/assess compliance to standard (in practice)


At organisation or service level Identify training needs


Using role competencies


Design training (to meet needs)


Pilot training


accreditation, usually from City & Guilds of London. If more tailored or bespoke


development programmes are required, then we are likely to adopt the approach outlined in Figure 2. Again, this starts with determining the Service Standard that is required to be met or complied with. This may or may not be based on the HTMs we use in the UK. Again, it is assessment led with an initial audit of compliance, in practice, being made. Delegates then follow the well-known training cycle. However, we add evaluation to this process so that we can recognise and feedback the added value that the


organisation has derived from this development programme. We quite often have an agent in


specific countries that work on our behalf to promote our courses and programmes and organise our quotations and tenders. Over the years we have delivered


training in this way in countries such as Saudi Arabia, UAE, Oman, Brazil, Hong Kong, Malaysia, etc (it’s a long list!).


Delivery via an in-country training partner We have several service contracts in place with delivery partners in a number of countries covering a number of disciplines


Determine standards


(for the service in the country) Based on HTMs?


Record and report achievements


Record qualifications


Competence Accreditation


Assessment


Assessment


Standards


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96