What AchieveCE learners are saying

The majority of the material in this course was geared toward medical providers. I'm an LCSW and only found the last few pages of material relevant to providing tele-therapy.

This course is geared towards pharmacists and pharmacy students, not nurses. Many of the videos are long, drawn out, and difficult to follow.

A biased approach. Very dismissive of client’s view on pain which is subjective to each person. Does not confront trauma issues that may manifest physically. Approaches relationship with suspicion between client with chronic pain and mental health professional. Does not broach client's therapeutic expectations. May influence mental health professionals to view clients with chronic pain in a negative light. Generalizes clients with chronic pain in a negative view as seeking secondary gains such as sympathy, financial benefits, and a means to get out of responsibility. May interfere with therapeutic alliance where client is looking for someone to validate their feelings. May lend to client perpetuating a role where they ignore their pain and suffer through to become acceptable to others especially the mental health counselor they may try to impress and seen as false progress towards therapeutic goals.

Not having the ability to skip courses not needed for the current cycle was a bit frustrating. In the future, the package should give the user the option to skip through courses not needed/already completed from other trainings.

needs a lot of proofreading to correct type errors. One section also has an incorrect answer in the test portion. Needs updating (especially involving infection control & COVID-`19)

Was mixed up. Usually there is text you read then answer questions, which there was but there were several questions that the answers were in dif sections. Also there were questions that the answers were not even in the text. I liked the course I took last time this one not so much & it was very long.

Some of the modules started out ok and could have been useful. But I feel they focused on the wrong things. I don't see how going in depth on the clinical trials is going to help me at all. Definitely missed the mark.

There were several typos throughout the material and the material was rather dry.

While some of the content was very helpful, the case studies appeared to be written by terrible AI bots. They were hard to follow and at times did not make sense. Characters were introduced without context. One of the case studies was missing, but test questions were asked on it anyway. Several of the test questions were confusing or made very little sense, and one of the them was a true/false question without a statement. I got it right, but that was just a lucky 50/50 guess.

topics where pre selected, not given choices of what one's interest is, inability chose which courses one takes, not taking into account already reported CEU's reported

extensively repetitive, prolix, excessive in details, which is distracting, making it difficult to retain the most important information. It takes at least twice the time stated in the description of the course. ( it takes at least 4 hours, instead of 2 hours).

I feel this is more pharmaceutical related then nurse's that work in doctors office's. Very hard to follow.

I would not endorse this course unless you are looking for a very general introduction to autism.

As I wrote in the previous survey, several units are very poorly written.

It was quite repetitive and contained too much information, much of which was not relevant to my field. The course content could have been more effectively summarized (ideally about 50% shorter).

I did not write all of the examples down but there were quite a few problems with the test questions either testing on material not contained in the proceeding literature, questions not being complete/not having a question, using unnecessarily stilted language, and questions not making any sense and/or misquoting names. I would SERIOUSLY advise the board and the creator of this test to proofread it. Finally, because I was questioning myself so much and going back trying to find things that did not exist - I kept getting told that I was taking longer than the test thought I should and when I would answer that I wanted to continue - it would refresh - one of the times - it deleted all of my answers (I was on question 25 by this point) and I had to do it all over again! I was furious! Some examples of faulty questions: In Case Three, ‘Supportive Therapy for a Lonely Lady, - there was not such case in the training ‘My Client Right or Wrong’ in Case Eight examines the serious legal and ethical issue of overidentification with a client at the expense of protecting a minor child. - this sentence is unclear and confusing. The counselor Nancy confided in concerning her case was wrong to go around Nancy and report Nancy’s inaction concerning informing the authorities of actual or suspected child abuse. - this sentence is incoherent and doesn’t make sense.

It was quite boring and hard to engage; the presenter didn't appear prepared enough, too much noise and pages being moved around in the background, and there were not enough slides to engage viewers.

Doesn't really apply to nursing care and skills. Very few things were actually relevant.

I did not care for the course being text only. I think videos make a course much more impactful. I also thought it was way too basic.

Missing case study. Difficult to answer some questions without the case study for review.

Just too much information about how to manage all the different types of pain for an audience that includes lots of doctors that don't prescribe pain medications.

I found a lot of it to be way more indepth or not directly impacting my area of work in the hospital.

I should have chosen a different course as this was geared towards pharmacists, not nurses.

There were questions on my exam that were not covered in the material. i.e. case studies