I agree with Neil that the Showing Evidence tool (especially the secondary version) can be quite intimidating when it is first viewed! I recently showed a group of educators at College America how to use the tools and set up their accounts, without going through a complete TwT training. Their Dean of Students was very interested in the tools, and they simply do not have the luxury of using PBL in their coursework, as their curriculum is pretty standardized among their sites around the country.
So, I created a tool with them the first time we were looking at it. I agree with you that this can be a good way to quickly show someone the benefits of the tool.
I'm interested to hear what others say!
P.S. The professors loved the tools and are using them now!
TWT is more fun to teach than Essentials because moving to the different tools has been motivation in itself especially after taking participants through the first tool. To respond to your first question, I am sure the structure of the CFQs can be changed but would think that it would be better to make the suggestion at Summit so that it is changed in the manual for everyone. In response to your second question, I created a sample of each of the tools during my initial training and use them as a guide to explain how the tool works after they have viewed teacher samples on the website. Having participants brainstorm ideas helps to provide guidance on setting up their tools and reduces the amount of time the teacher spends trying to figure out what to do.
Another strategy that works is demonstrating the tool the way it would be taught in the classroom. For example, if you were teaching the thinking tool, have participants brain storm a topic in word, copy and paste it into the thinking tools and have participants rank it. Once they go through the process the light bulb comes on!