Classroom Face-to-Face vs Online Remote Training October 11, 2020 From mid-March COVID turned our business upside down as students were either; not permitted or became reluctant to attend CBD-based classroom training. We pivoted quickly from our face-to-face (F2F) classes and moved all courses to remote instructor-led sessions. As restrictions eased, our trainers returned to our centres to conduct blended training sessions. Blended sessions combine F2F students with students attending remotely through MS Teams. Our normal session cap of 10 was retained to maintain the small, hands-on and interactive nature of the training that our students value. Currently, F2F student caps vary across the country depending on the state restrictions ranging from 0 in Melbourne and back to 10 in Perth and Adelaide. After 7 months of running blended instructor-led training, we can now talk from a position of experience, backed by data about how our students have scored their experience of remote training with versus face-to-face training. Students provide a score out of 5 and a comment at the conclusion of each training session. Sample size – 2102 students in the sample from 1st April to 12th October. This dataset includes sessions for public enrolment only. Overall Scores Delivery Method Average Score F2F 4.74 Remote 4.64 Total 4.68 Both F2F and Remote delivery score well F2F satisfaction scores are higher when comparing the 2 directly; Scores over time There was an understandable adjustment to remote delivery in April and May Our trainers have improved their remote satisfaction scores over time. F2F scored higher with the exception of June, a period of readjustment back to F2F. Student numbers over time - Remote versus F2F Students are returning to the classroom when allowed to do so. Forward bookings are showing a growing trend of students returning to the classroom.