My position as a Technical Trainer requires me to provide both traditional classroom training and virtual training. Prior to December, my company used Go to Meeting to conduct these training. We recently obtained the ability to use Go to Training. Knowing what I know about the clunkiness of Go to Meeting, I felt that a tool specifically for training had to be much better.
One of the issues with GTM was that the integrated audio would often cut out in the middle of a conversation. Surely a tool specifically for training would be better? Well it was not. Several times as I was in the middle of explaining a concept and I would be informed that my audio had gone out. Sigh. Aside from the ability to invite up to 50 people, for the students to virtually raise their hands and the instructor to see if the students are “paying attention” the GTT just felt like GTM with a few added perks.
One of the features of GTT that I thought would be beneficial was the ability to add materials to the training instead of having to email them. I quickly found out that even this feature was not worth it. While I could add materials from the GTT meeting page, while in the training itself, the students did not have access to the materials link. The materials were only available through the link that was emailed to the students at the beginning of the training.
The switch from GTM to GTT from my point of view as a user, was not necessary for the company to take on the added expense. This change is a great example of what may be the shiny new thing and being distracted by the newness even though the new thing may not necessarily be the best thing, either for the students or the instructor. The change from GTM to GTT didn’t improve my training or the student’s experience.
Erika's Doctorate of Technology Blog 