Additional to Marains piece in PN/Scratch...

[Bryony]

Hi,

http://www.thenailgeek.com/showthread.php?t=9458 link to original thread for a reminder.

Whilst looking at 'Chat room' piece in PN last night, made me think about how to impliment part of what I was trying to say.

Currently, you can have no background in nails or beauty and take an induction course with a product company of a few days, get insurance then go out and practice as a nail tech.

You can take an NVQ, VTCT, ITEC course if you wish but it's not compulsory, although, as opinion on the site suggests, those of us are serious about what we do would like it to be.

In reply to Marians article, I do think that nail technicians should gain sound knowledge from something like an NVQ before doing nails, but am concerned that in many cases, product companies still insist we take their own induction/foundation course before we can use their products. This all gets very expensive, and for those that have already taken a formal qualification, they already know (or should do!:biggrin: ) the theory behind it all.

So, what I was wondering......

What are the chances of product companies bringing about a change to their education system? For those who can supply proof of a formal qualification, the training is tailored to teach them only the additonal info they need.
So, for someone who has a formal manicure/pedicure qualification, instead of doing a full induction course, they do an amended course that covers the chemistry of nail enhancements, how to fit/apply tips, how product works etc. If there is an assessment at the end, this could still include some qustions not covered by the course, but that would have been covered by the formal qualification (e.g hygiene, structure of the nail).
For those who have a formal qualification that covers nail extensions, they should be able just to do a 'conversion' course. they already know how to apply tips/product etc. they just need training on the techniques that apply to that particular product. I also feel, they should not have to wait a set time after the formal qualification to do a conversion with a company. If someone knows which product they want to use, surely there are benefits to allowing them to train with it ASAP, rather than insist they wait x months and in the meantime get used to a different technique that another company uses. Not to mention the expense of training with various people beacuse you can't use the product you really want to.

Do you think this is a viable suggestion? Would you like to see it implemented?

Be interested to hear opinions.

P.S. Hope it all makes sense, late for work so not re-read it....

 

[geeg]

This is exactly what Creative Nail Design do.

If you have an NVQ, VCTC or ITEC diploma, then it is not necessary to wait and you can do a conversion class at any time which is mainly product training and not nail training.

This has been CND policy for years.

 

[mum]

Hi Bryony

Thanks for your thread. (Haven't visited here all day, hence delay in my post)

I do agree with the general sentiment of your thread, however..... (there's always a 'but' isn't there ). The basic level of 'formal' training needs to give the industry sufficient confidence to trust it i.e that it provides with a good level of skill and accurate understanding. If this was the case I am sure things would be different.

We have all heard plenty of stories where skills, techniques and understanding can leave a great deal to be desired from EVERY type of beginner training.

I belive that, in FE colleges, the main cause of this is the fact that the nail units were part of beauty and there has been no requirement for a nail technician (i.e a specialist) to teach it. It could be a beauty therapist who has done a 2 day course in one system many years agon and did the odd full set in a beauty salon. Product have traditionally filled the gap for beginner training but can do what they want, how they want. Some have done it brilliantly, others have just been interested in training revenue or product sales.

Hopefully, with new requirements in place, this will (slowly) start to change and basic training will become good enough to make this a better industry.

I absolutely agree that there should be company training (there is in the hair and beauty sectors) as the basic training should have brand specific techniques and product information as a minimum 'add-on' to the basics. How companies provide this is their decision and should play a part in a decision to use them (obviously the better training and support at not too much cost is a plus in their favour)

I think we may be on the way there but there is a way to go yet. The more people that 'embrace' these changes and support them and the fewer go down the 'cheapskate' route of minimum training, minimum investment, the better it will be for everyone and the future of a great industry.

Marian

 

[Bryony]

I do agree with the general sentiment of your thread, however..... (there's always a 'but' isn't there ). The basic level of 'formal' training needs to give the industry sufficient confidence to trust it i.e that it provides with a good level of skill and accurate understanding. If this was the case I am sure things would be different.

Sorry, didn't make myself very clear....I had the new nail NVQ/ ITEC in nail technology in mind when I was referring to formal training, so I did mean something that was specifically nails related, taught by a trained nail tech, rather than 'add ons' courses......


Gigi,

Didn't realise this is exactly how Creative worked. Although my post wasn't aimed at any company in particukar, it was a generic comment.
In the learning brochure, the bit for the Creative Conversion says you have proof of certificate but it also says you need to have been in the industry 12 months. So for someone who has only just passed an NVQ or equivalent, can they do the conversion as soon as they receive their certificate, if they can prove they have been studying longer than 12 months, or do they have to wait 12 months from when the certificate is dated??
Also, it says this about the 12 months on the page for L&P conversion, but not for Brisa or Fabric# - am I missing something?

 

[The Geek]

I'm on a roll posting about the CNA today!

Originally, we embraced the concept of a government qualification like an NVQ as having a sufficient level of education to be able to safely use CND's products without the need for something like a 'conversion' or minimum level of experience in the salon (like 12 months) - however a conversion was always recommended as it was such a cost effective way for anyone to start using the product.
After some time of allowing the previous NVQ standard to circumvent the pre-requisites; we discovered that the previous NVQ was not equipping professionals with even the minimum to circumvent the requisites we had in place.
That meant that we had to enforce a strategy of conversion and/or pre-assessment (meaning you had to sit with an Ambassador on a one to one basis to assess your skill level). This is still in place until we can be confident that holding an NVQ obtained from another training institution was of a quality that meets our minimum requirements for safely (and smartly) working with CND's products.

So yes, you can hold an NVQ and take a conversion in any of the 3 key systems (even though with our new education system there isn't a 'conversion' course per say).

I hope this helps clarify.

 

[mum]

Hi Bryony

I did realise you meant the new one. However, at this moment in time there is no Awarding Body requirement that teachers of the Nail Services NVQ (or equivilent) are specialists in nails! So although we have whole qualifications now and specific assessment requirements they can still be taught and assessed by beauty therapists who have 'done nails'. (I wrote a post on here recently about the standards of educators which explains the requirements.)

I personally don't think this is good enough and the issue has been raised with the appropriate authorities. I think we may be seeing this changing very soon and this will be a big step forward. The requirements should apply to nail technicians.

Hope this clarifies it a little
Marian

 

[Bryony]

Thank Sam and Marian,

Understood. :biggrin:

Marian,

Re. the teaching standards, you say it's been mentioned to the proper authorities to sort out.Is it a definately will happen, just a case of when? If not, for those that think the trainers should be properly qualified in nails, is there anything we can do push this issue with the authorities? If they get hounded enough they may respond??