Environmental Awareness Training, Page 387 Reviews

We ask our users to rate and review our course immediately after they've completed their training. Here's what people are saying...

USER REVIEWS

Average score 4.5

4063 reviews

  • 73% 5
  • 12% 4
  • 8% 3
  • 4% 2
  • 4% 1
Good course

Good course with good information

4/5
easy to use

Environmental Awareness is very important course. It was easy to use and i found very helpful

5/5
Fine, but some errors in numbers

Course material fine, but some of the numbers are incorrect. For example, the course mentions that recycling paper saves xxx kW of energy. kW are a unit of power, not energy.

3/5
Excellent easy course.

No summary provided

4/5
Very Informative

Really interesting and very informative, a good intro for staff

5/5
Easy to understand and follow

I was aware of the majority of the course content but found it a useful update that was clear and concise

4/5
Easy to use.

Very informative and helped get a better understanding of environmental awareness.

4/5
Frustrating

The videos kept lagging and the answers wouldn't log or take a long time to select. I'm sure it was your system and not the internet connection

2/5
okay

I think that there should be more testing on the actual impact of the environment and facts - there is too much focus on how many tons of this and values. These are relevant to a point but not as relevant as the actual facts. I scored 70% because I couldn't remember whether it was 10 million or 1 million.

3/5
Needs to be reviewed by a scientist.

The constant tendency to confuse the terms "carbon" and "carbon dioxide" was an irritation (carbon dioxide is the greenhouse gas produced by burning carbon; unburnt carbon is not a greenhouse gas). At least one of the test questions had no meaning (How much [something] do we produce...?) as it didn't specify whether it meant "we" as individuals, or the whole country, or the whole world. Talking of volumes of gas (e.g. enough to fill a hot air balloon) is also meaningless unless you specify the pressure (presumably atmospheric pressure in this case). While the overall thrust of the course is absolutely correct, the scientific inaccuracies really need to be addressed. I personally found the patronising tone of the presenter irritating, and the whole course contained considerable repetition and padding. However, I guess the course gets enough of the message over to enough people to be worthwhile.

2/5

Ready to get started?