First and foremost there should be two separate courses. One to be used as a transition course and one advanced IT application.
There should also be a method to give partial constructive credit, where a soldier may have experience in networking, but not in applications.
Transition course can be either in-house, on-line or a combination.
Most every class is available on-line.
CCNA1/Network Fundamentals –Cisco Academy: CCNA Exploration - Network Fundamentals
CCNA2/Wireless LANs – Cisco Academy: CCNA Exploration -
CCNA3/Switching Technologies – Cisco Academy: CCNA Exploration -
CCNA4/WAN Technologies – Cisco Academy: CCNA Exploration -
The CCNA Exploration curriculum is composed of four courses:
• Network Fundamentals
• Routing Protocols and Concepts
• LAN Switching and Wireless
• Accessing the WAN
Cisco Security – Cisco Academy: CCNA Security 1.0 Implementing Network Security
IT Projects - ??
LAN/WAN Integration -PHD
Windows 2003 Server MOC 2274 - Course 2274: Managing a Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Environment (e-learning)
MS Network Services MOC 2277 - Course 2277: Implementing, Managing, and Maintaining a Windows Server 2003 Network Infrastructure: Network Services (e-learning)
MS Active Directory Svc MOC 2279 - Course 2279: Planning, Implementing, and Maintaining a Windows Server 2003 Active Directory Infrastructure (e-learning)
MS Exchange MOC 5047 - Course 5047: Introduction to Installing and Managing Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 SP1 (e-learning)
Knowledge Management - PHD
SQL Server 2005 MOC 2780 - MOC Course 2780: Maintaining a Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Database
MS SharePoint 2007 - Course 5061A: Implementing Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007 (??)
MS Expressions - ???
SharePoint Designer - Building Web Applications with Microsoft Office SharePoint Designer 2007 Step by Step (book)
Voice over IP -
Synchronous Collaboration Server (ADOBE Connect)
NETAPP Storage Area Networks (SAN)
Project Management
Windows Security
CISSP
DIACAP
Net Management
JNN
STAMIS
Understand the need to make a PCS to enable the Army to move soldier through the assignment pipeline, but that is no reason to make this course longer then it needs to be.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
FA53 CLASS Notes
Introduction to VOIP
SSG Mojia/MS Boyd
DAY 01
Very slow start it would be nice to have condition and standard for the end state of the course. This is critical to know what kind of learning I need to do. Do I just sit here and listen? Do I listen for content? Do I listen for knowledge?
The class is nice and loud with all the switches running, but the instructor can't or won't speak up.
Instructor (SSG) read straight from the slides, and talked to the slides most of the time. Appeared to be unsure of the data they were presenting, as if this is all new to them. Reading the slides is never a good way to present data, I could do that myself.
This class is not an intro to VOIP, but a sales pitch for Cisco and Cisco devices, we spent way too much time on how to use the phones we have in class, not what VOIP is and how to implement it.
I am not sure what is up wiht this instructor, cannot give a staright answer on how we will be assessed. She was going on about how may differnt ways that she could test us. This should be nailed down before the class started so we know what to expect.
Day 02
Practical Exercises(PE), not desigend for this classroom, but for another class, making it very confusing. It would be very easy to change and taylor for this room.
Instructor is very snippy, very abrassive, with students, not a good instructor. Does not forstering an learning environment.
Always has excuses about the slide, says they are not here slides and she cannot update them here.
Call mamanger are not treset from the last class. This made the loading the phone dificule since there were many error, untill the instructor manually reconfigured the switch. This showed lack of preperation for the class.
Slides images/screen shots are small and hard to read.
PE are hard to read and folllow. When printed. the are no page number of titles, making it had to keep track of which piece of paper goes to which PE.
Day 03
Instructor is being very biligerent. when helping another student the instructor told the student to delete several settings, and then found out the student was deleting setting on my system. When I expressed concern that I now had to figure out what was deleted and what I had to redue. The response was "Oh well this is a training environment." Later in the same day a student did the same thing and the instructor fixed the other students computer settings.
90% of the students are lost an require help to get thorought the practice exercises. There are very confusing and do not help in learning the material. We have to teach our selves, becousl the instructor cannot seem to present the information in a manner that allows up to learn
Adobe Connect
Mrs. New
Some portions of the labs were good, but they were more reading then actual exercise. The labs said you could do thing but you were never asked to actually do anything.
Teach what this type of product can be used for and how we can implement it, not how to install it.
Course should be dropped, the book can walk you though the install, that is all you need.
The instructor was helpful, good instructor, bad course. The courses is basically how to install software, this is way below where we should be in this course. Actually class was only a couple of hours of instruction, the rest of the class was doing the same install over and over again. The test did actually test that we could install, but that was it. The course should have been along the lines on how to use the product, not simply how to install, this particular product.
NetApps
Ms Cobb, Mr Rainge, SSG Taylor
Slow start. Did not go over the learning expectations
Labs from the book, are very confusing. Right out of the box the first lab, is so out of date that is cannot be done. The instructor would only make excuses, not offering solutions.
Playing tag team with the instructors, a little confusing. They are not fully prepared for class, had to move in the middle of the first day, computers were not ready. Computer not fully set up, vertical machines had to be reset. Instructors not talking with one another, each seem to have their own agenda, as to what to teach.
Instructors simply read from the slides. We can read, just as well as they can. So no added benefit to having the instructors in front of the class. If the instructor was more prepared the class would not be so boring.
Instructor are not willing to help students that are struggling, they let them struggle for more then a hour, on the exercise that should only take 15 min, other students had to help the struggling student while the instructor sat around and shot the bull with each other. Poor uses of time management, many down time in the class.
Continuously using confusing terms, almost like they are making things up. Also, use many acronyms without explaining them, showing a lack of knowledge on how to teach students (teaching 101) Having hard time taking their knowledge and converting it into useful information.
Instructors not respecting the student as people and senior leader in the military, but they like to drop doe to say we are just student and try to excerpt some authority over us.
Exam notes:
>useradmin group add <group>
> useradmin user add YoungH -g <group>
* Group must be added first
Project Management
Mr Tom Duffey
Did not go over any course expectations. Instructor had no idea how long the class is scheduled for, should check then schedule.
Has no idea what we have or have not been through, course wise. Could talk a few minutes to review out schedule to see what classes we have had and then what classes we still have left.
Instructor is ok instructor, did his homework and at least read the book and does not read from the slides, but has no depth of application of the subject. Wrong instructor for this topic. This is a critical class, but is being handled as just another class to chase some certification.
Uses poor examples. Constantly references things that they are familiar with for examples, but have no direct correlation to the class as a whole.
Books are very confusing and do not really explain the terms and process very well.. lots of little snippets, bit not cohesive, not set up for actual learning, but may be good if the goal of the class is taking a test. (but since we do not know that the goal of the class is it is hard to tell where we are heading)
Class work seems to be just made up busy work. If it lead into a final project or was the grade for the class then it might have be more useful. It takes up too much time and with the instructor complaining about not having enough time, then busy work should be cut out or count as the final (like the other PhD taught classes)
Serious problem volume of material for this type of class. Slides were basically taken strait from the book. one or more slides per page. Needs to be pared way down to become effective.
This would be a good PMP test prep course, but this is not what we should be learning. Most people will not take the test and do not have experience to become certified. Wrong type of course for this audience.
Windows security
Mrs Garrett/Jones??
Day 4
Instructor not sure what the other instructor taught in the previous class.
Instructor not really prepared for class, had to wait numerous time for instructor to get handouts or even request handouts.
Instructor did not care if students learned or had all materials for class.
Day 5
Instructors trained to time not to standard, more worried if students were in class for the time allowed.
Instructor did not have a complete grasp on the material being taught, continually reading and looking at notes.
Instructor glosses over very relevant information, items like audit logs and retina scans are very important to when we do as a FA53, but the instructor unable to relate the course information
Material on test was not covered in class material.
CISSP
Mr McLean
Day 1
Poor time management
might be knowledge, ok as teacher, hard to understand speach, needs to work on speaking ablility, not an effective communicator.
"this here" needs to control bubbieze
Does try to draw the class in.
Day 2
CCCure Quizzer / freepracticetests are nice to use, but not in advance of a class as a measure of what a student know. What is does is confuse the student not teaching them what right looks like. This should be used as check on learning, not a knowlegde check. This could actually hamper the student by confusing them into thinking that they did now was correct.
Instructor lacking well rounded knowleged. Did not understand Appliaction Developlment domain and it showed. Giving out bad or poor information.
Covers material, then says it is not really important. So where is the benifit to this block of instruction?
simplies reads for notes, showing a lack of understanding and indepth knowledge of the subjuect matters.
Instructor continually yawned as he read the material.
Review of material was poor.
DIACAP
Mrs Clark/Mrs Jones
Day 01
Instructors have problems with class flow.
Does not know audience, does not know who she was teaching. Instructor actually told us to run away from the DIACAP process.
Continually reads for slides, demonstrating a lack of knowledge of the subject.
Both instructors read from their slides, actually facing the slide, talking to the whiteboard and not the class.
Not prepared and ready to teach. Tries to go to web sites during class, should have checked the sites and had them preloaded before start of class.
Many slides were poorly done, hard to read, too small, too much information. No quality control.
WE ALL KNOW HOW TO READ, the instructor does not need to read EACH word on EACH slide.
Wrong words used on slides for acronym. Acronym for POA&M was spelled out as Plan of Action & Mitigation and was continually wrong. Should be Milestones not Mitigation. Instructor was aware of this and just kept pointing it out, instead of fixing it. So the information we have is wrong, which leads us to ask what else is wrong, making anything given us potentially useless.
SSG Mojia/MS Boyd
DAY 01
Very slow start it would be nice to have condition and standard for the end state of the course. This is critical to know what kind of learning I need to do. Do I just sit here and listen? Do I listen for content? Do I listen for knowledge?
The class is nice and loud with all the switches running, but the instructor can't or won't speak up.
Instructor (SSG) read straight from the slides, and talked to the slides most of the time. Appeared to be unsure of the data they were presenting, as if this is all new to them. Reading the slides is never a good way to present data, I could do that myself.
This class is not an intro to VOIP, but a sales pitch for Cisco and Cisco devices, we spent way too much time on how to use the phones we have in class, not what VOIP is and how to implement it.
I am not sure what is up wiht this instructor, cannot give a staright answer on how we will be assessed. She was going on about how may differnt ways that she could test us. This should be nailed down before the class started so we know what to expect.
Day 02
Practical Exercises(PE), not desigend for this classroom, but for another class, making it very confusing. It would be very easy to change and taylor for this room.
Instructor is very snippy, very abrassive, with students, not a good instructor. Does not forstering an learning environment.
Always has excuses about the slide, says they are not here slides and she cannot update them here.
Call mamanger are not treset from the last class. This made the loading the phone dificule since there were many error, untill the instructor manually reconfigured the switch. This showed lack of preperation for the class.
Slides images/screen shots are small and hard to read.
PE are hard to read and folllow. When printed. the are no page number of titles, making it had to keep track of which piece of paper goes to which PE.
Day 03
Instructor is being very biligerent. when helping another student the instructor told the student to delete several settings, and then found out the student was deleting setting on my system. When I expressed concern that I now had to figure out what was deleted and what I had to redue. The response was "Oh well this is a training environment." Later in the same day a student did the same thing and the instructor fixed the other students computer settings.
90% of the students are lost an require help to get thorought the practice exercises. There are very confusing and do not help in learning the material. We have to teach our selves, becousl the instructor cannot seem to present the information in a manner that allows up to learn
Adobe Connect
Mrs. New
Some portions of the labs were good, but they were more reading then actual exercise. The labs said you could do thing but you were never asked to actually do anything.
Teach what this type of product can be used for and how we can implement it, not how to install it.
Course should be dropped, the book can walk you though the install, that is all you need.
The instructor was helpful, good instructor, bad course. The courses is basically how to install software, this is way below where we should be in this course. Actually class was only a couple of hours of instruction, the rest of the class was doing the same install over and over again. The test did actually test that we could install, but that was it. The course should have been along the lines on how to use the product, not simply how to install, this particular product.
NetApps
Ms Cobb, Mr Rainge, SSG Taylor
Slow start. Did not go over the learning expectations
Labs from the book, are very confusing. Right out of the box the first lab, is so out of date that is cannot be done. The instructor would only make excuses, not offering solutions.
Playing tag team with the instructors, a little confusing. They are not fully prepared for class, had to move in the middle of the first day, computers were not ready. Computer not fully set up, vertical machines had to be reset. Instructors not talking with one another, each seem to have their own agenda, as to what to teach.
Instructors simply read from the slides. We can read, just as well as they can. So no added benefit to having the instructors in front of the class. If the instructor was more prepared the class would not be so boring.
Instructor are not willing to help students that are struggling, they let them struggle for more then a hour, on the exercise that should only take 15 min, other students had to help the struggling student while the instructor sat around and shot the bull with each other. Poor uses of time management, many down time in the class.
Continuously using confusing terms, almost like they are making things up. Also, use many acronyms without explaining them, showing a lack of knowledge on how to teach students (teaching 101) Having hard time taking their knowledge and converting it into useful information.
Instructors not respecting the student as people and senior leader in the military, but they like to drop doe to say we are just student and try to excerpt some authority over us.
Exam notes:
>useradmin group add <group>
> useradmin user add YoungH -g <group>
* Group must be added first
Project Management
Mr Tom Duffey
Did not go over any course expectations. Instructor had no idea how long the class is scheduled for, should check then schedule.
Has no idea what we have or have not been through, course wise. Could talk a few minutes to review out schedule to see what classes we have had and then what classes we still have left.
Instructor is ok instructor, did his homework and at least read the book and does not read from the slides, but has no depth of application of the subject. Wrong instructor for this topic. This is a critical class, but is being handled as just another class to chase some certification.
Uses poor examples. Constantly references things that they are familiar with for examples, but have no direct correlation to the class as a whole.
Books are very confusing and do not really explain the terms and process very well.. lots of little snippets, bit not cohesive, not set up for actual learning, but may be good if the goal of the class is taking a test. (but since we do not know that the goal of the class is it is hard to tell where we are heading)
Class work seems to be just made up busy work. If it lead into a final project or was the grade for the class then it might have be more useful. It takes up too much time and with the instructor complaining about not having enough time, then busy work should be cut out or count as the final (like the other PhD taught classes)
Serious problem volume of material for this type of class. Slides were basically taken strait from the book. one or more slides per page. Needs to be pared way down to become effective.
This would be a good PMP test prep course, but this is not what we should be learning. Most people will not take the test and do not have experience to become certified. Wrong type of course for this audience.
Windows security
Mrs Garrett/Jones??
Day 4
Instructor not sure what the other instructor taught in the previous class.
Instructor not really prepared for class, had to wait numerous time for instructor to get handouts or even request handouts.
Instructor did not care if students learned or had all materials for class.
Day 5
Instructors trained to time not to standard, more worried if students were in class for the time allowed.
Instructor did not have a complete grasp on the material being taught, continually reading and looking at notes.
Instructor glosses over very relevant information, items like audit logs and retina scans are very important to when we do as a FA53, but the instructor unable to relate the course information
Material on test was not covered in class material.
CISSP
Mr McLean
Day 1
Poor time management
might be knowledge, ok as teacher, hard to understand speach, needs to work on speaking ablility, not an effective communicator.
"this here" needs to control bubbieze
Does try to draw the class in.
Day 2
CCCure Quizzer / freepracticetests are nice to use, but not in advance of a class as a measure of what a student know. What is does is confuse the student not teaching them what right looks like. This should be used as check on learning, not a knowlegde check. This could actually hamper the student by confusing them into thinking that they did now was correct.
Instructor lacking well rounded knowleged. Did not understand Appliaction Developlment domain and it showed. Giving out bad or poor information.
Covers material, then says it is not really important. So where is the benifit to this block of instruction?
simplies reads for notes, showing a lack of understanding and indepth knowledge of the subjuect matters.
Instructor continually yawned as he read the material.
Review of material was poor.
DIACAP
Mrs Clark/Mrs Jones
Day 01
Instructors have problems with class flow.
Does not know audience, does not know who she was teaching. Instructor actually told us to run away from the DIACAP process.
Continually reads for slides, demonstrating a lack of knowledge of the subject.
Both instructors read from their slides, actually facing the slide, talking to the whiteboard and not the class.
Not prepared and ready to teach. Tries to go to web sites during class, should have checked the sites and had them preloaded before start of class.
Many slides were poorly done, hard to read, too small, too much information. No quality control.
WE ALL KNOW HOW TO READ, the instructor does not need to read EACH word on EACH slide.
Wrong words used on slides for acronym. Acronym for POA&M was spelled out as Plan of Action & Mitigation and was continually wrong. Should be Milestones not Mitigation. Instructor was aware of this and just kept pointing it out, instead of fixing it. So the information we have is wrong, which leads us to ask what else is wrong, making anything given us potentially useless.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)