So, who wants to be the first person to openly discuss how much they charge for teaching CompTIA classes?

The exact release date has not been specified. Pearson VUE will send your beta exam results directly to you via mail once the new exam is officially released.

"Please note: results will not be available until the exam launches in Q1, 2025."

Good Evening Eddie,

Thank you

Tess Sluijter said:

Oh no, it's literally the first thing I ask, because there's too many organisations trying to pull a fast one.

I need to know if responding is going to be worth it for me in the end.

First you tell me what the pay will be, then I will apply.

Click to expand...

I typically have a fee that I use when I teach online, and it's based on class size and yes there are factors that go into it, such as dates, times and length of each session to name a couple.

Jill West said:

It seems to be a lower level of cyber than I would have expected, but perhaps this is appropriate and the exam will mature over time. It also seems to have a lot of generic AI content that is not specific to cyber. I would have expected that content to reside in a foundational AI exam, not an AI security exam. But again, this seems to be a common pattern for CompTIA to start kind of low and let the exam mature through later iterations. It'll be interesting to see how the actual exam translates these objectives into exam questions and (perhaps?) PBQs.

Click to expand...

True observation...I agree-clearer cyber-specific focus would enhance the AI Security angle and CompTIA Expansions: PenTest AI+, CySA AI+, Data AI+, AI Prompt+, AI Architect+, AI Scripting+, AI SysOp+, * AI+ here the focus is on AI

Registered! and this will be great to watch and learn.

Thank you, Stephen. I'm already Signed up and I'm looking forward to it.

Yesterday's CIN Sneak Peek for the CompTIA A+ 1200 series was great. If you've not see it yet it's available On Demand.

Michael Schmitz said:

Hello, since the Cloud+ had only 4 sessions, there was only one Week to watch the recordings after the last session. Since session 4 was on Oct. 10th, the window closed on Oct. 17th. So Rick, as he is normally 100% correct, did not hit this time this topic. .one of the few misses he made.
But this was mentioned in all Recordings from Session 1-4, that there is only one week instead the normal 2 weeks..
So, i would suggest, that you ask your Training Partner, to ask the Programm Manager about a free Voucher or Discount.
Maybe CloudX will be a chance for you next year, or 2027 for Cloud+ 005 Version

Sorry, but that where the Rules.

Michael

Click to expand...

Stephen Schneiter said:

Hello @abiodun1991, you are correct that in most cases for the TTT series there is a two-week grace period in which attendees can catch up on-demand in order to be considered for a voucher. The Cloud+ TTT was different since there were only 4 sessions and a full week between the four sessions. It was decided that there was plenty of time for attendees to get caught up on the first two sessions, and we would just need to offer a one-week grace period.

With all that said, with the data team working on the DataX TTT series voucher distribution, they did not pull the Cloud+ series attendence until last week. So, the two week policy still held. Hope this helps.

Click to expand...

Hi Stephen, I'm late to reply in the thread so bare with me. I always save my Certificate of Completions. Anyway, if I attended CV0-004 on 10/3, 10/4, 10/10 and viewed my missing one on 10/17 by 11:00 am EST, Should I have been or received a voucher for Cloud+ as well as the DataX since I attended all of those as well? I ask as I've not received either so curious if I was missed from the data pull.

Not to knock on @Rick Butler . Some for-profit schools have tainted the pool for others in that field. The same can be applied public and private non-profit institutions. The tuition is usually higher, but doesn't necessarily reflect a higher or better education. One example would be see the average earnings of graduates and the 6 yr completion rates (Refer to the College Scorecard from the Dept. Of Ed.). That will provide a better example of the value of their education. To show their value and employability. That standard is also applied in other areas of higher education. Paying a hire tuition rate doesn't not equate to higher pay in the near term. There are numerous examples to that affect.

To bring this back to @Greg Childers comments. The lack of standards is glaring. If this was a private organization, public traded company, or public entity. There would be a multitude of questions and repercussions (i.e., SuperMicro possible delisting from the NASDAQ).There are generally accepted standards that are applied to review what as done before. Why are they not being applied here? Expedency can be beneficial, but what is lost for the sake of expedency.

My question is this.

Will the new offerings of AI Essentials, SecAI, a+ Network, and a+ cyber have full CE+certifications? Will they have good for life certificates? Or nothing but training?

As I mentioned in a previous post, one of the DOGE employees had ties to cybercriminal organizations.

Where is the transparency? Where are the controls?

Tess Sluijter said:

As much as I dislike the current-day LLM / AI fad, those objectives look surprisingly okay.

Click to expand...

It seems to be a lower level of cyber than I would have expected, but perhaps this is appropriate and the exam will mature over time. It also seems to have a lot of generic AI content that is not specific to cyber. I would have expected that content to reside in a foundational AI exam, not an AI security exam. But again, this seems to be a common pattern for CompTIA to start kind of low and let the exam mature through later iterations. It'll be interesting to see how the actual exam translates these objectives into exam questions and (perhaps?) PBQs.

Something I'd like to do, after getting through the pile of other certs I want to do...

*sigh* - I know I'm going to regret this post...but...okay, I'll go play in traffic here...

Gregory Childers said:

Why have they found none?

Click to expand...

The doge.gov website went online as of this morning which, we hope, will provide an accounting of, not just the fraud, but the wasted spending in various departments. I personally look forward to shining that big light into the Department of Education. Our school, IntelliTec, is one of those evil for-profit prop/trade schools that get the shade for high tuitions. Thing is, our sector does not have access to government funding, apart from Title IV and VA, where we have much more stringent rules, such as Gainful Employment, 90/10 (85/15) and so on, as well as our accreditors' requirements for graduation and placement. The big State U schools don't have the same rules as we do. The dirty secret is that the cost to educate a student is the same - public or private. Subsidy makes all the difference. And I have personally observed wasted spending on programs that do not result in outcomes.

In the technical education sector, our drive is to ensure students are employable when they hit the workforce. We partner with CompTIA specifically, but teaching Microsoft, a bit of Cisco - the list goes on. But the private sector's employability is what is graded, lest we lose Title IV. The big box colleges don't have those same constraints. So when we teach, we have to teach to certification and employability - it's a matter of survival for our programs. Again, the big box colleges don't have those same issues - and they are far well funded than we are.

Gregory Childers said:

Why are they using hackers with ties to cybercriminal activity and not forensic auditors?

Click to expand...

How are we defining 'hacker'? The traditional 'play with technology to see how it works' or what we might define as a 'clandestine penetration specialist'?

Personally, some of this young blood can peel through the layers before politicians and their in-pocket judges can react. The speed of information retrieval is vital in an audit; it keeps the guilty from being able to hide the bodies and finding the fraud. But it wouldn't be the first time the government has had people with sketchy backgrounds in its midst with security clearances.

dwightwatt said:

I got mine in December 1997 and then starting studying and taking the 7 exams for MCSE NT4. A+ passed both on same day not really knowing what it was but techs doing cabling at new campus I had started at were talking about it and studying and from conversations figured I knew it. MCSE NT4 was different. Some of 7 tests I did one time, several 2 times and first I did (fundamentals) 3 times, as I had to learn to think MS as only way and I knew lots of varieties of networking, hands-on.

Click to expand...

This is pretty much the exact same story I had. I was working for CSC and taking the MCSE NT4 track in 1997-1998 and completed exam six (Exchange 5.5) in an adaptive format which took me 16 minutes to finish. I was so happy. Got back to the office, only to have one shlub tell me, "yah, but you don't have A+!".

"Wow...really?", looking at his very smug disposition. "Fine, Ace. Next Friday, I'll correct that little 'oversight'."

So, I did. Two exams, back to back with zero prep that week. Passed 'em both and boss walked back into the shop, with my six MCSE passes in one hand, my A+ in the other.

"So...yah...you don't have even ONE Microsoft exam, do you? Oh, hey look, the A+, both tests, and all eight of these were passes on the first try, even. Whatchugot...Ace?"

Walked out to with this track in my head: Login to view embedded media
I've gotten a bit more humble since then. I encourage more than dis people now. Microsoft is a different world for sure. And like the techie sado-masochist I am, I took the TCP/IP exam first... I was a savage in those days. I went on to do the additional three to get the MCSE+I extension. The Win2000 upgrade exam, tho, humbled me - it was my first and only loss. Since that time, I never underestimated an exam again - and as such, have never failed another one (knock on wood).

Tess Sluijter said:

Never heard of this thing... You say you got access to it, so tell us more: who are the vendor?? Where can we find more information?

Click to expand...

Hi Tess, my CompTIA rep gave me access to it on the training platform.

I received my voucher, kept it safe and due to other obligations, I ended up forgetting about it (it expired). I regret it to this day... &;-D

DOGE is attempting to cut medical research grants, social security, and the Department of Education. This is not business as usual.

And if they were looking for fraud, I have two questions:

Why have they found none?

Why are they using hackers with ties to cybercriminal activity and not forensic auditors?

Tess Sluijter said:

Never heard of this thing... You say you got access to it, so tell us more: who are the vendor?? Where can we find more information?

Click to expand...

It's in the CompTIA store. They have new offerings for the following:

a+ Cyber
a+ Network
AI Essentials

It's listed under "Other training"

Registred ! Thank you

Never heard of this thing... You say you got access to it, so tell us more: who are the vendor?? Where can we find more information?

COOL for TTT