RE: General comments on Cisco Teaching [7:64833]
Cisco Nuts wrote: Howard, Why in the world would Cisco start at 92001 for the CCSI? Any particular reason for such a high number? I think CCSI uses hierarchical addressing unlike the flat addressing used for CCIE. :-) Also, to answer someone else's question, I think you get to keep your number (and use it?) indefinitely. I'm 96110, the 110th one in 1996. Must have been a good year. But as Howard has said, you can't really use the number and be an active CCSI unless you are currently employed at a Cisco Certified Learning Partner (or employed at Cisco itself.) My guess is that if you were inactive for a while and then went to a new learning partner, you would have to go through a barrage of tests again, but probably keep your number. But I don't know for sure Maybe if the economy ever picks up again there will be a lot of people trying to get an answer to that question. Not looking good for now, though. By the way, did y'all see this excellent article about teaching in TCP Magazine. It's called So You Wanna Teach. The comments on the article are worth reading too. http://www.tcpmag.com/linkstate/article.asp?EditorialsID=135 ___ Priscilla Oppenheimer www.troubleshootingnetworks.com www.priscilla.com Now we all know for a fact why the CCIE # start at 1025? So From: Howard C. Berkowitz Reply-To: Howard C. Berkowitz To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: General comments on Cisco Teaching [7:64833] Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 01:04:28 GMT Howard CSSI 93005 Howard, If you were a Cisco Instructor years ago, is it safe to assume the CSSI number started at 93000?? Just curios. 92001, I believe. Not sure. On a serious note, are you allowed to still add the cert and number after your name if you become inactive? No one ever really came up with a good set of rules. Recertification was never as well defined as it was with CCIE and the like. I have no problem in saying inactive -- the irony being that I'm currently on a subcontract developing internal courseware for Cisco staff. Since a CSSI is not all that meaningful except in the context of a training partner, the active-versus-inactive distinction isn't that significant -- if you are doing approved Cisco training, it will be active with the partner; if you aren't, it won't. It's not as if you can go into business as a Cisco instructor just by having a CSSI. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64854t=64833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64939t=64833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: General comments on Cisco Teaching [7:64833]
Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote in message ... But as Howard has said, you can't really use the number and be an active CCSI unless you are currently employed at a Cisco Certified Learning Partner (or employed at Cisco itself.) Cisco, CLP's, CLSP's (solutions partner) and ILP's (internal learning partner). I don't know if there are any ILP's, but say -- for example, IBM wanted a bunch of in-house CCSI's to teach official Cisco course material. Of course, they would also have access to buy the instructor and student material for the official courses. If a company is spending greater than, say, a certain amount (ROI in BE, NPV, etc) on training, it might be beneficial to move into an ILP relationship with Cisco (of course, it's probably just as good to move into a full CLP or CLSP relationship, I don't know all the benefits/tradeoffs and Cisco doesn't have any information on even how to start a CLP business or anything about ILP's on their website). Also - to be a CLP, you might also be able to provide online learning only, in which case you could probably still have your employees get CCSI status, and never have them teach a classroom course (although I don't see the point unless you just want the designation for personal growth opportunities), thus avoiding expensive classrooms, facilities, and lab equipment. Check this url for more details on what CLP's/CLSP's are all about: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/learning/le31/le29/learning_about_learning_partne rs.html Claims 120 Learning partners, 1600 certified instructors WW. -dre Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64958t=64833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: General comments on Cisco Teaching [7:64833]
seeing as the CCSI number uses only 2 digits for the date field, did the program implode as Y2K came and went? ;- -- TANSTAAFL there ain't no such thing as a free lunch Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Cisco Nuts wrote: Howard, Why in the world would Cisco start at 92001 for the CCSI? Any particular reason for such a high number? I think CCSI uses hierarchical addressing unlike the flat addressing used for CCIE. :-) Also, to answer someone else's question, I think you get to keep your number (and use it?) indefinitely. I'm 96110, the 110th one in 1996. Must have been a good year. But as Howard has said, you can't really use the number and be an active CCSI unless you are currently employed at a Cisco Certified Learning Partner (or employed at Cisco itself.) My guess is that if you were inactive for a while and then went to a new learning partner, you would have to go through a barrage of tests again, but probably keep your number. But I don't know for sure Maybe if the economy ever picks up again there will be a lot of people trying to get an answer to that question. Not looking good for now, though. By the way, did y'all see this excellent article about teaching in TCP Magazine. It's called So You Wanna Teach. The comments on the article are worth reading too. http://www.tcpmag.com/linkstate/article.asp?EditorialsID=135 ___ Priscilla Oppenheimer www.troubleshootingnetworks.com www.priscilla.com Now we all know for a fact why the CCIE # start at 1025? So From: Howard C. Berkowitz Reply-To: Howard C. Berkowitz To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: General comments on Cisco Teaching [7:64833] Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 01:04:28 GMT Howard CSSI 93005 Howard, If you were a Cisco Instructor years ago, is it safe to assume the CSSI number started at 93000?? Just curios. 92001, I believe. Not sure. On a serious note, are you allowed to still add the cert and number after your name if you become inactive? No one ever really came up with a good set of rules. Recertification was never as well defined as it was with CCIE and the like. I have no problem in saying inactive -- the irony being that I'm currently on a subcontract developing internal courseware for Cisco staff. Since a CSSI is not all that meaningful except in the context of a training partner, the active-versus-inactive distinction isn't that significant -- if you are doing approved Cisco training, it will be active with the partner; if you aren't, it won't. It's not as if you can go into business as a Cisco instructor just by having a CSSI. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64854t=64833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=65007t=64833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: General comments on Cisco Teaching [7:64833]
Howard, Why in the world would Cisco start at 92001 for the CCSI? Any particular reason for such a high number? Now we all know for a fact why the CCIE # start at 1025? So From: Howard C. Berkowitz Reply-To: Howard C. Berkowitz To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: General comments on Cisco Teaching [7:64833] Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 01:04:28 GMT Howard CSSI 93005 Howard, If you were a Cisco Instructor years ago, is it safe to assume the CSSI number started at 93000?? Just curios. 92001, I believe. Not sure. On a serious note, are you allowed to still add the cert and number after your name if you become inactive? No one ever really came up with a good set of rules. Recertification was never as well defined as it was with CCIE and the like. I have no problem in saying inactive -- the irony being that I'm currently on a subcontract developing internal courseware for Cisco staff. Since a CSSI is not all that meaningful except in the context of a training partner, the active-versus-inactive distinction isn't that significant -- if you are doing approved Cisco training, it will be active with the partner; if you aren't, it won't. It's not as if you can go into business as a Cisco instructor just by having a CSSI. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64854t=64833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64864t=64833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: General comments on Cisco Teaching [7:64833]
Howard, Why in the world would Cisco start at 92001 for the CCSI? Any particular reason for such a high number? First CSSI in 1992. I was the fifth in 1993. Now we all know for a fact why the CCIE # start at 1025? So From: Howard C. Berkowitz Reply-To: Howard C. Berkowitz To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: General comments on Cisco Teaching [7:64833] Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 01:04:28 GMT Howard CSSI 93005 Howard, If you were a Cisco Instructor years ago, is it safe to assume the CSSI number started at 93000?? Just curios. 92001, I believe. Not sure. On a serious note, are you allowed to still add the cert and number after your name if you become inactive? No one ever really came up with a good set of rules. Recertification was never as well defined as it was with CCIE and the like. I have no problem in saying inactive -- the irony being that I'm currently on a subcontract developing internal courseware for Cisco staff. Since a CSSI is not all that meaningful except in the context of a training partner, the active-versus-inactive distinction isn't that significant -- if you are doing approved Cisco training, it will be active with the partner; if you aren't, it won't. It's not as if you can go into business as a Cisco instructor just by having a CSSI. Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64866t=64833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: General comments on Cisco Teaching [7:64833]
Howard, Why in the world would Cisco start at 92001 for the CCSI? Any particular reason for such a high number? Now we all know for a fact why the CCIE # start at 1025? So who was the first CCSI?? Does anyone know? From: Howard C. Berkowitz Reply-To: Howard C. Berkowitz To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: General comments on Cisco Teaching [7:64833] Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 01:04:28 GMT Howard CSSI 93005 Howard, If you were a Cisco Instructor years ago, is it safe to assume the CSSI number started at 93000?? Just curios. 92001, I believe. Not sure. On a serious note, are you allowed to still add the cert and number after your name if you become inactive? No one ever really came up with a good set of rules. Recertification was never as well defined as it was with CCIE and the like. I have no problem in saying inactive -- the irony being that I'm currently on a subcontract developing internal courseware for Cisco staff. Since a CSSI is not all that meaningful except in the context of a training partner, the active-versus-inactive distinction isn't that significant -- if you are doing approved Cisco training, it will be active with the partner; if you aren't, it won't. It's not as if you can go into business as a Cisco instructor just by having a CSSI. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64854t=64833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64865t=64833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
General comments on Cisco Teaching [7:64833]
In the last few weeks, there have been several posts about becoming an instructor. It's not always clear if CSSI is part of the picture. Even with Cisco, the nature of, and need for, certification has changed over the years. When I was certified, about 10 years ago, there were no instructor exams. In fact, there were no exams at all -- CCIE came about two years later. There was a structure of attending courses, going through extensive interviews, and then teaching all or part of classes under the eyes of a Cisco employee. In addition to the test teaching, we'd go into the lab and try random things, or sit in front of several instructors and be grilled on general networking. My observed teaching took three weeks, which was longer than normal since I had a heart problem midway through and was in the hospital or recovering for a couple of weeks -- they wanted to be sure I was up to speed. Even after the in-person approval, we received provisional certification, which meant that our student reviews got individual reading for three months or so, and Cisco local people were often in our classes to give reviews. Now, with CSSI exams and a need to handle more instructors, the process has changed significantly. Let me make some general comments. First, there certainly are financially successful instructors that don't have CSSIs, and don't work for training partners. Such people, however, usually have some name recognition in the industry (e.g., books) or have extensive work experience. Second, you can only become a CSSI when sponsored by a Cisco Learning Partner, or, in some very specialized cases, by Cisco itself. In the case of learning partners, that involves, aside from any expense in preparing you, several thousand dollars in instructor license fees to Cisco. So, there needs to be a very strong business case for the partner to authorize the expense of a new instructor. The reality is that some partners have unilaterally done pay cuts for their existing instructors, and there are a fair number of experienced instructors that are out of work. Depending on the circumstances, a laid-off instructor may or may not need to be recertified, but the new sponsor will almost certainly need to pay fees to Cisco. Third, technical knowledge isn't the only thing expected of instructors. The ability to communicate with humans is critical. That means several things -- speaking ability, some level of charisma in the classroom, the ability to walk people through troubleshooting such that they learn from it, and, often, the ability to prepare handouts and even modifiy courses (e.g., for onsite private courses). Many of these expectations mean that the instructor must have superb oral and written communications skills. While some of the people asking the questions may not have English as a first language and would not be teaching in English, to have serious chances, your written communications must be impeccable. If you emailed a Learning Partner with a cover note containing chat speech, it would be extremely likely your application would be rejected instantly. If you are considering teaching or courseware development, it's a good idea to practice excellent writing, even in informal posts to this list. Howard CSSI 93005 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64833t=64833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: General comments on Cisco Teaching [7:64833]
Howard CSSI 93005 Howard, If you were a Cisco Instructor years ago, is it safe to assume the CSSI number started at 93000?? Just curios. On a serious note, are you allowed to still add the cert and number after your name if you become inactive? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64850t=64833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: General comments on Cisco Teaching [7:64833]
Howard CSSI 93005 Howard, If you were a Cisco Instructor years ago, is it safe to assume the CSSI number started at 93000?? Just curios. 92001, I believe. Not sure. On a serious note, are you allowed to still add the cert and number after your name if you become inactive? No one ever really came up with a good set of rules. Recertification was never as well defined as it was with CCIE and the like. I have no problem in saying inactive -- the irony being that I'm currently on a subcontract developing internal courseware for Cisco staff. Since a CSSI is not all that meaningful except in the context of a training partner, the active-versus-inactive distinction isn't that significant -- if you are doing approved Cisco training, it will be active with the partner; if you aren't, it won't. It's not as if you can go into business as a Cisco instructor just by having a CSSI. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64854t=64833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
