“It didn't make me that happy. The first course I attended with alan Nixon for the ITIL Service Design course was really interesting and kept my attention captured through the 3-day. Unfortunately, I can't say the same about the ITIL Service Operations held with Peter Farenden. The course wasn't organised properly, which wasn't well strucutred, and also the lecturer didn't have any teaching skills.”
“1) numerous spelling errors in the course, maybe this can be corrected
2) no content table to the slides, during open book exam this would be extremely usefull, to have the subjects and pages. I did it myself to write out a content table over 3 pages.
Regards
stijn Maesen”
“- missing a pdf of the theory that can be referenced when doing the labs, instead of text underneath the videos.
- labs are fine but noticed at the end of 3rd module that am missing exchange with fellow participants (I did a course in November where some people took part remotely but were included in that the instructor made them part of the group); being in a group is important to exchange knowledge that others and the instructor have gathered in the field.
-find it harder to integrate 2+ hours into or adding this to a work day as the modules are very long.
- good layout, can easily be managed; would prefer to give the option do the lab or the test first and then the video - have them arranged so that labs could be done in one go if preferred.
- on the whole a good experience, but learning better in the classroom where you have e.g. pair work in labs to keep participants alert”
“We should receive more explanation about the Technologies and receive more feedback about ours mistakes.
The course is not a course or a workshop.. its justa a LAB and read by your self the PDFs method.”
“Overall the course provided a good overview of the capabilities of CRM and provided me with a lot of areas for development in my own time. My only criticism was with the method of delivery.
With a content-heavy course it was common for the trainer to spend many minutes talking about every tickbox, parameter or setting but very little time on providing context and why it was important to know it. My personal opinion is that each module should have been more interactive to encourage the learner to practice as they are learning instead of listening for 56 minutes and using for 4 out of any given hour on a small lab.
The manuals that were supplied were also littered with errors and were poorly written. The slides the trainer was using did not match the material in the manuals nor the order of the modules so it was quite often during the latter part of the week that I was unable to follow fully as what was being discussed was not relevant to what was in front of me.”
“Fast Track to Red Hat Linux 7 System Administrator
Attended the course in March 2016 organised by StayAhead through Global Knowledge.
This is a pre-requisite for Red Hat Linux 7 System Admin 3.
I then attended Red Hat Linux 7 System Admin 3 ran by Red Hat.
I am somewhat amazed to see the technical differences between the two courses, not in terms of the topics, but on the quality, technical expertise, and the equipment provided.
To be fair, StayAhead charges quite substantially (x00 Pounds) less....”
“Would have given top marks for the trainer who was excellent but it felt to me as if it should have been a five day course. The work material had several mistakes including a complete set of slides which were copied from an earlier example and not updated. The training facilities were not quite up to scratch either. The screen was too small and so we followed the slides on our laptops and handheld devices which kind of worked but because these were delivered as a pdf the resolution was bad on a lot of the images. It also made scrolling backwards and forwards difficult. Overall, it was a good course and the online pack is a useful resource.”
“I am just giving normal because the DB image server was corrupted so we were not able to do some Lab's, and the training documentation was out of date. The Softlayer portal add been updated since they review the training documentation.”
“The accommodation for the training was fine, no issues with the equipment etc.
The trainer did not seem to be 100% up to speed with the course, it seemed like he hadn't done the SharePoint 2013 Core Development course in a while or had not prepared, he had some problems explaining certain things clearly and getting the demos to work. This made it harder to understand what he was trying to explain as often we could not see examples working in a real world scenario. The course was too reliant on typing code in fast and seeing the outcome rather than going through the content slower and understanding what we were trying to produce.”
“The quality of the course I attended(Architecting for AWS) was very high but the details for how to get to the course and what to take with me where not. Several calls to Global Knowledge were required on the first morning just to get to the correct location as it was being held at a vendor site. Also attendees had to supply their own workstation devices. Not the best start to the course.”
“The teacher did it very good. He explained things in a good way and was responsive for all questions and reflections. He also had a good voice for virtual classes. He was easy and not tiring to listen to.
The training course material though, was not optimal written. The chapters containing the labs were sometimes very detailed in its instructions and in other labs very much were taken for granted. Along with a not so inituive interface in the System Center Configuration Manager application, the estimated time slots for the labs were always too short. There are definately space for improvement there.”
“The course was longer than was necessary for the level of knowledge required. As an attend from anywhere candidate, I found the sound quality to be a major issue and would suggest candidates go for the classroom sessions if possible.”
“I attended parts 1 and 2 of AUCCE, unfortunately I have my material in 2 different formats, I have part 1 in Cisco Box form and part 2 on online form, would have been nice for my Part 1 to be online or vice versa.”
“Studying the CompTIA Network + course. For the amount of money paid, I am disappointed that we did not complete the course. I bought the book and at the start of the course I asked the instructor what parts do we not need to know. He replied we need to study all of the contents of the book. The 4 day course only covered 12 chapters of the 20 chapters in the book. So we only really covered two thirds of the course!”
