Please settle an argument at work.
I use Novice for someone that’s already begun training. They’re still not very good at whatever they are learning. But, they have started training and know some of the basics.
Beginner is someone that’s either not started at all or maybe had a lesson or two. You have to show some progress in training to earn the title Novice.
I don’t consider this words synonyms. The person at work that proof read some training materials I’m developing disagrees.
What do you think?
I just don’t agree with Webster. IIRC many, many years ago in Karate lessons. You earned the right to call yourself a Novice. You didn’t just walk into the Dojo calling yourself a Novice on day 1. That would be extremely disrespectful to the Sensei.
Depending upon the activity, a novice could be very skilled, unlike a beginner.
A novice apprentice may have completed several years of training but has not yet reached their master status. Some apprentice pieces I have seen over the years take a huge amount of skill and yet may only be used to demonstrate a set level of competence.
The novice apprentice may be able to produce work to a very high standard, but not able to do it at an industry acceptable rate.
Beginners have no skills, or perhaps just an interest or some hobbyist experimentation.
Novices will have had some formal training and may produce work or demonstrations of skills to a high level.
Apprentices, Journeymen, or BlackBelts in certain styles are competent in their own right to produce, perform and teach Novices.
Masters are generally regarded as the highest level of skill their trade above and beyond the accepted level of “Finish” of the previous level.