I am instructor at a local junior college and I teach courses in networking and cybersecurity. I recently started teaching the Network Security course that Cisco offers for students and was pleased to discover that it essentially was the old CCNA-Security curriculum (with updates). I have enjoyed teaching this course at it was one of my favorites when I was student several years ago. However, I do have three disappointments that I would like to mention to see what others thought about this and perhaps if Cisco is re-thinking anything.
1. Completing the instructor course for the Network Security course was a great refresher and a great deal of fun (like I said, it's one of my favorites), however, I was disappointed to find out that we do not receive any continuing education credit for completing the course. This course of study is just as challenging as others at the CCNA level, so I am curious as to why Cisco does not award continuing education credit for its completion.
2. It was my understanding that when the certification pathways were revised in February 2020, that the security and collaboration pathways would be integrated into the full CCNA curriculum. I am disappointed to say, that I do not see evidence of this consolidation. I have found no significant training in the current CCNA curriculum regarding collaboration technologies, particularly VoIP and the security education has not increased anymore than what it previously was, as is evidence of the retention of a Network Security training curriculum with no certification option at the end. I think Cisco should seriously consider bringing back the CCNA-Security and some type of CCNA-Collaboration certification; even if it's a specialist addition endorsement or something, there should be something more than just a "good job" and a handshake from the instructor for doing the class.
3. The last thing I've noticed is the CCNA and the Network Security courses seemed to be more packet tracer-based than live labs. Because of this, I find many of my fellow instructors following the exact Cisco program with maintaining a simulator heavy class at all levels, with little live device lab assignments. While I will admit that I have expanded on the baseline curriculum to include live machine labs in all my Cisco classes at a higher ratio than the packet tracer labs. I started doing this after I had many students in other non-Cisco courses I teach tell me that they had no idea what a switch, router, firewall, ASA, or any live hardware device looks like, and once I showed them, they were nervous about touching it, because they didn't want to "break it." I find this disheartening; in my eyes Cisco training and certifications are best in the business, but not if we're training people to work simulators and not the actual job equipment. As a former hiring manager, I wouldn't hire someone who is only trained on packet tracer and I would be wary to take them on as an intern, though I probably would just to give the person the opportunity to learn the live device, but not everyone is like me. I would like to hear some thoughts about these observations; if my fellow instructors are just being lazy, I would like to know cause I'll stir the pot where I'm at and motivate some change.
I appreciate anyone's insight on any of these points; if what I'm seeing is off the mark, please point it out - Cisco made a difference for me when I made a midlife career change many years ago and I huge fan, so I want Cisco to continue to be the best and lead the way...
Thank you,
Jim N.
