As to whether a new structure will make it simpler, I would say that we may be making the process more complicated on the face of it, but more user-friendly and cost effective for most people. The terms “easy” and “hard” are not how I want to think about the new structure. I want to focus on the cost-effectiveness, interest-orientation, quality of understanding and usefulness of learning. If we design a structure that provides more opportunities, more internet options, more topics of interest, and all including CT principles and concepts, we will be sharing CT with the world and a greater number of individuals around the globe.
Japan and Korea (and perhaps other regions) have designed and provided the CT/RT/LM somewhat differently than the USA. They seem to do a great deal more demonstration of effectiveness to the user to encourage them to engage in the training. Their numbers of participants and members of their local organizations are increasing in number much greater than what we have seen in the USA in the last decade. Their numbers are growing, ours are declining. I would like to hear more about their success stories. What is working for them? Could it be included in our new design?