Need Feedback on a New Training Series I'm Developing

[Jim Pemberton]

I'm working on a series of training classes (classroom and on line), and the first in the series is going to discuss, among other things, the cleaning products you use.

I'm debating whether to teach the chemistry end (more than the usual stuff on surfactants, a better understanding of pH, etc) or to take it from the product that the student readily identifies on the shelf/truck (How different traffic lane presprays work and why, use a detergent, an acid rinse, or clear water rinse and the pros and cons of each, the differences between the wide variety of spot and stain removers and what they really do, etc)

The "how to use the stuff on the job" will be in a different class.

So my question again is:

1. Teach chemistry
2. Teach products
3. Have two different classes and teach both.

Thanks!

 

[Ken Snow]

Jim

I love the idea of getting outside the box that ICRC has instructors in. I also would recommend offering either an online class or Web based training program so that it can be more affordable, convenient and more effective learning for people/companies from all over the US. I read somewhere that the average person only retains the first 15-20 minutes and the last 15-20 minutes of instruction. Obviously this varies based on how the instruction is formatted the inividual instructors charisma and the students attention span/interest in the subject matter. I believe "at your own pace" learning is the wave of the future and would love to see you & Pemberton's be at the forefront of this in our industry. I will commit to being your first company client if you decide to go this route. Just shoot me an email when it's ready and I will order.

Ken

 

[Desk Jockey]

Both.

I would say take it from the product they identify with first, then a second class that delves more into the chemistry as to why chems preform the way they do.

If you go over the practical everyday use then hopefully they can relate the chemistry back to how it applies to them day to day.

 

[harryhides]

A lot would depend on the length of each class.
A half day just on chemistry and you will have a room full of zombies at the end of the day.
The problem with teaching "Product" is that it assumes that all of your students are using the same products.

I'd suggest doing the chemistry on-line in very small bites.
Then doing "Product" and application or "how to read a Safety Data sheet" in person.

Give a man a fish and he'll be hungry again the nest day - teach him how to fish and he'll never starve.
Teach your students the principles of chemistry and then they will be much better equipped to decide what works best for them AND why.

Mikey on Harv's Ipad

 

[Ron Werner]

Both need to be taught.
The chemistry is stuff that I remember from highschool, so there's 2-3yrs of chem classes that some guys will try to learn within a couple days.

The products, ie talking about specifics, helps guys to identify what they need to use.

Carpet Cleaning High School

 

[The Great Oz]

Jim,
Back when the association could still hold courses, I collected as many products as possible so students could see five different types or brands of “strong alkaline pre-spray” and other chemistry. This not only didn’t come close to covering what guys were using, it was hard work to put it together. (Say hard several times, with a curling emphasis.) Students liked seeing actual products though, and it gave the instructor a way to directly answer questions about what products would fit the chemistry being taught.

A long way around to say the chemical/product tie-in works, as long as it’s done well.

As far as how you’re going to teach this... I can only answer for what would work well for a company like ours.

What I’d like to see would be an online course or course segments for the chemistry and have each segment then show (or link to) information about appropriate products. Students could get up and move around a little, maybe even take segments on different days, and have time to noodle around the internet for more information about any products they were using that might not have been mentioned.

The “how to use this stuff” could be the in-classroom component, possibly with students bringing samples of the products they were already using.

Good luck,
Bryan

 

[Gary Taylor]

I am more interested in what will work, not how it works.

 

[Dolly Llama]

to reach/improve the "masses"......
bare bones 8th grade level "basic" chemistry as an introduction to teaching the products

separate stand alone advanced chemistry classes for the gEEks that think it makes a difference if they know "how and why" a product/chem works

as a "practical" matter, it doesn't much matter if a BD knows the hows and whys of bUbblEs...
much more important are the "wheres and whens" to use them....with emphasis on safe/responsible use of such


..L.T.A.

 

[Ken Snow]

Perfectly said Meat! :-)

 

[Ron Werner]

doesn't knowing the "hows and whys" help you when determining the "wheres and whens"?
esp on something new you run across

 

[XTREME1]

Teach products

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

The question is more of a short-term/long-term benefit question.

If you simply teach the product information, the information is limited in scope and value to the customer. Sometimes, that's all they want, but I don't know if you are doing them any favors.

We used to have Stone-Tech classes. The biggest complaint by far is that the classes were as product-centric as you could get. Virtually none of the information could be applied to products from another manufacturer. While I know that Jim is not considering making any training as extreme, my point is that you have to lay a foundation so that you can understand why you choose a particular product for a specific task.

You an only make independent decisions on products if you have the fundamentals of chemistry taught and understood, first.

However, it is a two way street. Product manufacturers need to have information readily available on the product labels. It is a disturbing trend that I see that not very many manufacturers are doing this. Product labels have fallen into the trap of being "consumer friendly" marketing pieces, and stopped being technically friendly for those users who have the fundamentals down, but have not taken the manufacturers product-specific course of instruction.

A manufacturer's holy grail is to have customers who only know how to use their specific products, and don't have enough savvy to carry that knowledge to another brand. I personally don't see it as a good thing.

 

[truckmount girl]

Teaching products is a slippery slope. You don't want to be accused of being biased to particular lines.

Well, unless the whole idea is to have those companies paying you to feature their products...which, it would be my guess, is not your aim.

My suggestion; teach the hows and why's and at the first break or lunch ask the guys to go to their trucks and bring in some of their favorite products and then discuss what (and why) each does and how to determine it by reading labels. Ask them how they use it, when and at what dilution...it should really shed light on improper usage, give them ideas on new ways to use the same products more effectively, etc. You can even do some comparisons if the guys are game.

This avoids the possibility that folks will consider it an "infomercial" and the possibility of anyone (manufacturer, end user, BB watchdog) accusing you of pushing or promoting or featuring one line over another.

It's also more real world to the person behind the wand. If you are talking about their stuff they're going to pay more attention.

You will soon find out how many are using pre-spray as emulsifier, reducers when they should be using oxidizers, who is spraying protectant improperly, etc. and it gives all an opportunity to learn from and help each other if presented propewrly.

Take care,
Lisa

 

[Dolly Llama]

doesn't knowing the "hows and whys" help you when determining the "wheres and whens"?
esp on something new you run across

you'll have to give me an example, Ron
cause beyond the minimum chemistry basics, i don't see how it would help.


to know how oxidizers and reducers work on the molecular level doesn't help me determine whether an unidentified stain is organic or synthetic in nature

It matters little to me if i know how co-solvents saponify oils to make them water soluble

Tell me sanitizers kill bugz, I couldn't care less how the bacteria dies


guess I'm just not a lab coat, PH paper, distilled water and pocket microscope carrying kind of guy.
(not that there's anything wrong with that)

"practical" education on when, where and safe use is what most of the BD's out there need..or want

naw'mean??




..L.T.A.

 

[Ron Werner]

I remember long time ago, ran into lipstick for the first time. Since I knew it was a petroleum product I knew I could use a degreaser on it, something that would cut that type of soiling, ie a citrus gel.

If you can identify the problem you can identify the remedy easier if you understand how things react.
Also, isn't knowing "when" to use an oxidizer vs a reducer the same as knowing "how" it works. Might not need the molecular detail but an understanding helps to educate the client so they have more trust in you, not to mention it would boost your own confidence in using it.

 

[LisaWagnerCRS]

Part of what is missing in training today is that we have a whole host of courses that teach "what to think" instead of "how to think." You give a list of facts to memorize for a test, instead of learning the inner workings of how to actually clean at a superior level.

When I taught my rug workshop for Jon-Don for several years - which was NOT the IICRC class (came out beforehand, but I did help on that committee because I do think some "standard" needs to be out there to hit... and what they created was better than nothing, but not what I ever wanted to teach... I hope that makes sense) - anyway, I did not want anyone to worry about memorizing facts, I wanted them to understand how to become a great rug cleaner, at least on the basics.

I literally let them pull products and tools off of the shelves (Jon-Don was very cool about that...) and we got to literally see with rugs in class, what worked, and what sucked - so I did not have to say to them "this doesn't work" and just have them take my word ... they would see it for themselves. And we'd discuss why or why not.

From that angle, Lisa's points on pulling items from their vans makes sense - it's what they know, and they could compare with other items. But if I knew their choice sucked, I'd give them another option and make them see it sucked themselves. My job is to help them be the BEST cleaner possible, and not to just settle for what is most convenient to buy, or what they know. But I charged a lot for my course, so I attracted cleaners who were not robots just using things without thought - I wanted people who wanted to become specialists, and understand why they work and be able to constantly become better because they understood how to approach different situations.

That said - I was clear on certain things I believe strongly about, and products I loved, and methods I used - and instead of just telling them why, I showed them why. I know that is why many who happened to take my pricey course at that time are still cleaning rugs now. I made it make sense, and was not trying to be some instructor that believes they are "so smart." I'd rather have them leave saying that they learned so much, not that I was so smart.

Both need to be taught Jim. And REAL products need to be used. Always allowing for comparisons.

That is a failing with the rug course taught by many right now - you don't get to go see REAL rug plants and train there, so you only get trained in the pit methods, or the surface cleaning methods - and the teachers currently teaching the rug IICRC courses then sell the pits and solutions they use, so it is a big infomercial.

I don't mind selling things - I love to sell - but when you know there are some better cleaning methods out there and you do not teach them "in action" - then you are doing a disservice to the students and their clients. And when you prevent others from teaching the course because you want to limit competition - well, that is simply unethical.

We sold a lot of product at Jon-Don, which was great ... but I let the students choose what to use, and choose what to buy, and added my two cents when appropriate, and mentioned products not sold by Jon-Don when appropriate as well - which they were always very good about also.

If I were Ruth, Jeff, or Aaron and had to sell during a class to make the real money, maybe I'd have a different perspective.. but I did not need to teach to sell to make my living, it was just what I did for fun on my own time, made some money at it but it was not my "livelihood" so I was free to do what I wanted based on my values rather than having my hands tied to one line.

That said, any course that truly teaches needs hands-on training, and the basics can be taught beforehand so they arrive with some know-how on chemistry, though some things are cool to see in action.

Thanks for the question... it's been interesting reading everyone's perspectives here.

Lisa

 

[ronbeatty]

Jim, I have taken most of the iicrc classes. I have left the classes wondering what products to use to implement what I just learned. Have the class, teach the people how to do it, what to use, and you will have full classes. I might even come for a refresher. :mrgreen:

 

[Joe Bristor]

The best chemistry prof. I ever had took every opportunity to teach us to 'think' about how everything around us is chemistry.
From the dirt under our fingernails to the weekend hangovers, to the word problems only solved with the calculus, he could relate every topic to the chemistry of our little world. I don't remember much but I did go from a drop-out to minoring in chemistry cuz of him. He was amazing.

I know exactly how I'd do it.
I'd teach it in a way they can understand it (the chemistry) and relate to it in achieving the desired end result and refer to it throughout the course. And I'd state it as our main goal for the first hour - to have them chemistry pros by the end of that first hour.
Then I'd phrase my instruction as pointed questions so they would all have sweaty palms from beginning to end.
At any point I would be able to ask,
...so what chemistry do we need for tannin stains ummm ... Rick? OXIDATION!
...what neutralizes bleach ... Tony? REDUCER!
...what kind of red dye will this chemical work on, ummmm Susan ?...
etc
So that the meat of the course would be hands on technique, since we know that cleaning is learned by doing.
In the end the student could pick up about any product and know what it's useed for and why.

 

[John Watson]

Quite a few years ago we at the CCINW talked about making a laminated " Generic to major brand " cross reference chart, When I contacted the Juice makers, I was told they didn't wish to partcipate (Not exacyly in this mannor or words.) Bottom line at the time was it happened right at the time every one started to make their own juice so to be fair we needed to list all and they didn't want the gen cleaner to know the other brands that was the same, more or less than theirs... I was told the laminated sheet would probobly be the size of a sheet of plywood.... if we included all chem manufactures...

 

[Joe Bristor]

big ahahs :idea: for an upholstery class from little real world examples that ‘get through’…


1. David Moye’s post about how encap agents get rust out

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=40759

2. years of experience statements, summing up all we need to know about rust removers as reducers …

"All acids are "bleaches" (although not all bleaches are acids). They all are forms of reducing agents or stripping bleaches, which means they remove oxygen. Some are far more effective at this than others.

Rust is a form of oxidation; the addition of oxygen (iron oxide).

Therefore, any acid can remove rust. However, usually a stronger acid (oxalic, hydrofloric, ammonium biflouride) will be more effective than a weaker acid (acetic, citric, sulfamic).

The fact that the carpet was polypropylene helped.

Jose Smith"


Some real eye-openers for me… things I learned that gave me a whole new insight.

3. When studying plant based cleaners, I found one that was touted as an anti-oxidant, got through to me on a nutrition as well as cleaning chemistry level, then when I hung nails into a jar of the (aqueous) solution and no rust formed, man I was sold.

4. When I let knowledge of chemistry help me … Red Relief (reducer) worked in alternation with Stain Magic (oxidizer) on tough stains like grapejuice, wow.

5. I thought I knew polypro but it never even dawned on me until I heard Steve Poulos sp? explain that ‘it floats’. I couldn’t help but blurt out ‘oh yeah, like ski rope huh?’ boy did I feel dumb, but I never cleaned olefin the same way again.

6. And I never used a glue gun on olefin after the first time I melted it. Too bad I wasn’t listening when Steve had taught us that it melts at 250F or less.

7. Knowing how wool responds to acids, I started using all fiber rinses at 3:1 on tough wool stains and later just bot a drum of Dupont’s glycolic. Now it’s all I use to dissolve urine salts.

8. On wool, what would you use to get out the last tinge of red or green from blood dripped onto wool? (I learned this trick from the Aussies).

9. What revelations can you relate that will help Jim teach his class?
Share these things here and our whole group can grow. Is that so wrong?
It’s these light bulbs that will have your students forever remembering where they learned to be an upholstery cleaning pro.



10.

11.

12.


Where did we all learn how to make our own oxidizer, booster, etc?
Is it wrong?
And to think, I got booted off ICS - for sharing these little ahahs :idea: !
You gonna boot me Mikey?

 

[Shawn Forsythe]

"All acids are "bleaches" (although not all bleaches are acids). They all are forms of reducing agents or stripping bleaches, which means they remove oxygen. ....

Perfect example, Joe. But I don't think it makes the point you were specifying.

The example illustrates the problem with anecdotes. Sometimes one person's limited observation alone leads to completely false illusion of a conclusion.
To state or imply that acids are always bleaches, and furthermore all are forms of reducing agents is categorically false. This conclusion results from limited observation of most of the chemicals that one person has had experience with.

Someone using any acid they might want to use, expecting that it is going to be a reducing reaction is horribly mistaken.

Here are a a handful of oxidative acids. Nitric Acid, Perchloric acid, Sulfuric acid, Persulfuric acid, and Hydrogen Peroxide.

Yes, Jim definitely needs to have basic chemistry as part of the curriculum.

 

[truckmount girl]

Also, never discount the idea that although an instructor, no matter how knowledgeable or experienced, may have preferences for certain products (whether financial or performance or safety based) there may be a better way they don't know about yet and allowing the students to demonstrate their products and methods can not only show the weaknesses of such, but may also teach the instructor a new trick or formula once in a while.

Can you imagine if 6 years ago, you held a class on how to optimize the performance of a truckmount and happened to have someone like Greenie or Noble in your class?

Never make the assumption that the instructor is the most knowledgeable person in the class. We can all learn from one another.

Take care,
Lisa

 

[Jim Pemberton]

Never make the assumption that the instructor is the most knowledgeable person in the class. We can all learn from one another.

Which is one of the reasons I've asked this advice. I really appreciate this from all of you. Few people have the amount of bright people with a such a wide variety of opinions and backgrounds that I do here with all of you.

Lisa "truckmount girl" Weber: Thanks for the reminder to remain humble and open minded.

Lisa "rug chick" Wagner: Thanks for the "how to think" comment. That alone justifies explaining the chemistry and fibers so that they can make their own decisions on the right products to use, especially if caught in a situation where they may not have the specific one talked about.

Thanks to all the guys too!