DIT 4th year follow on course

ConfusedTech · 30-03-2009 04:51PM

I havent read all the posts above as I am restricted for time, but picked up a few things from above.
I think that Cormac and the team have done a sterling job. It took some time to do this and there was a massive amount of work involved. I am sure that Cormac is playing his cards close to his chest because it would be suicide to release too much information at this time without everything properly tied down. I for one would not have a problem with him looking after his own IT first, as I have seen first hand the work that the team put in and obstacles that other ITs put in the way.

His invovlement in the IATGN is probably unfortunate on the basis that having the same person invovled in both the course and the IATGN could be a conflict of interest, but he has done great in both.

As a DIT student, I would hope that the promise that we got of a degeree course will follow through and I will be given the option of getting in on it, as I feel that it is a continuation of what I did there!

pseudo-tech · 30-03-2009 05:05PM

ConfusedTech wrote: »

I think that Cormac and the team have done a sterling job. It took some time to do this and there was a massive amount of work involved. I am sure that Cormac is playing his cards close to his chest because it would be suicide to release too much information at this time without everything properly tied down.

Agree with you1

ConfusedTech wrote: »

I for one would not have a problem with him looking after his own IT first, as I have seen first hand the work that the team put in and obstacles that other ITs put in the way.

Is there something that everyone else is not aware of. If other I.T.s are being difficult, they should also be exposed for doing so. It is not right that these people (who are public servants after all), should be allowed to play with peoples futures. Its a joke and a clear example of how there is no such thing as joined up thinking in the Civil Service!

ConfusedTech wrote: »

His invovlement in the IATGN is probably unfortunate on the basis that having the same person invovled in both the course and the IATGN could be a conflict of interest, but he has done great in both.

There is certainly a conflict of interest! How can one be objective when your goals are personal and parochial? I would love to hear your explaination on how the performance within the IATGN was great when the results to date are poor!

ConfusedTech wrote: »

As a DIT student, I would hope that the promise that we got of a degeree course will follow through and I will be given the option of getting in on it, as I feel that it is a continuation of what I did there!

The best of luck in with this, if you return!

ConfusedTech · 30-03-2009 05:20PM

Pseudo, Most colleges and universities are run as business'. I have never seen any sense of unity in my times there. I wont get into it, but I do know for a fact that the staff of DIT have done a lot of work over the past 7 years, and some of the other ITs just re-hashed their course work to comply. I can be corrected on this, but this is what I saw.

My comments re the IATGN is that Cormac did a lot of the ground work at the beginning. I totally agree that in recent times it has slowed significantly. I would like to be a fly on the wall there, as I dont know why this is.

I agree totally with you in that a united front is the only way forward. To be honest, I am a bit lost at the moment as to what the hell is happening. Frustrated.........

pseudo-tech · 30-03-2009 05:33PM

ConfusedTech wrote: »

Pseudo, Most colleges and universities are run as business'. I have never seen any sense of unity in my times there. I wont get into it, but I do know for a fact that the staff of DIT have done a lot of work over the past 7 years, and some of the other ITs just re-hashed their course work to comply. I can be corrected on this, but this is what I saw.

I understand the concept of the business need, to create a point of difference. However, DIT has an advantage anyway with the vast majority of our population situated around Dublin. Differentiating themselves by creating the only Degree that is accredited is neglecting all the other Technicians that dont have easy access to Dublin for family reasons etc. By not having a collective approach to this problem and by DIT being secretive will only exacerbate an already poor situation. This is unacceptable in my eyes!

ConfusedTech wrote: »

My comments re the IATGN is that Cormac did a lot of the ground work at the beginning. I totally agree that in recent times it has slowed significantly. I would like to be a fly on the wall there, as I dont know why this is.

Again, i agree with you in full that the work at the beginning has to be commended. I can also recall that the aforementioned Degree was presented by the IATGN at the start as the future standard for membership of the new ATI. When you tie this and the fact that the DIT will have the only accredited Degree course, it make you wonder. I have no problem if Cormac or any of the other academics on the ITAGN committee were to be straight and say we have created a need for a Degree but i do have a problem with a recognised Degree being restricted to one Institute and that Institute having a captive audience on the back of the IATGN!

ConfusedTech wrote: »

I agree totally with you in that a united front is the only way forward. To be honest, I am a bit lost at the moment as to what the hell is happening. Frustrated.........

Agree with you in full!

sydthebeat · 30-03-2009 05:44PM

pseudo-tech wrote: »

I understand the concept of the business need, to create a point of difference. However, DIT has an advantage anyway with the vast majority of our population situated around Dublin. Differentiating themselves by creating the only Degree that is accredited is neglecting all the other Technicians that dont have easy access to Dublin for family reasons etc.

this is not a strong argument at all IMHO.

We live on a small island. Come the end of the year you will be able to drive from galway to dublin and from cork to dublin direct, both in less than 2.5 hours.

This argument is a kin to the 'regional hospital' argument. A 'centre of excellence' makes so much more sense in the context of a small country like ours.

thinking that a dublin based college, having gone through all the effort to achieve accreditation, should somehow farm out its courses to smaller regional colleges, just so non-dublin based technicians have less distance to travel, is nonsensical. If one has a family, then one needs to make an oppurtunity cost decision, as one does with everythng else in ones life.

fatchops · 30-03-2009 05:49PM

I think the DIT are right to keep their cards close to their chest. Someone has to dip their toe in the water and they will succeed of fail on the merits of their course structure and content. If they crash and burn they will do it alone, if they succeed, they pave the way for all other IT's to follow and negotiate all the pitfalls they may otherwise have encountered.

pseudo-tech · 30-03-2009 06:11PM

sydthebeat wrote: »

this is not a strong argument at all IMHO.

We live on a small island. Come the end of the year you will be able to drive from galway to dublin and from cork to dublin direct, both in less than 2.5 hours.

This argument is a kin to the 'regional hospital' argument. A 'centre of excellence' makes so much more sense in the context of a small country like ours.

thinking that a dublin based college, having gone through all the effort to achieve accreditation, should somehow farm out its courses to smaller regional colleges, just so non-dublin based technicians have less distance to travel, is nonsensical. If one has a family, then one needs to make an oppurtunity cost decision, as one does with everythng else in ones life.

I suggest that you might review the National Spatial Strategy Plan which positions Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford as gateway cities. The purpose of this is to provide centres of excelence in all these cities. The centralisation of everything has failed and is a National planning disgrace at this moment in time.

On top of that there are Degree courses out there that should be supported and there should be a National standard that they should all reach. There are other I.T.s ouside these gateway cities and there should be a question on whether these should continue to run or not.

I would also suggest that your comment about smaller regional colleges is wide of the mark and without foundation. DIT has been lagging behind many of its smaller friends for a long time now!

sydthebeat · 30-03-2009 06:39PM

pseudo-tech wrote: »

I suggest that you might review the National Spatial Strategy Plan which positions Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford as gateway cities. The purpose of this is to provide centres of excelence in all these cities. The centralisation of everything has failed and is a National planning disgrace at this moment in time.

On top of that there are Degree courses out there that should be supported and there should be a National standard that they should all reach. There are other I.T.s ouside these gateway cities and there should be a question on whether these should continue to run or not.

I would also suggest that your comment about smaller regional colleges is wide of the mark and without foundation. DIT has been lagging behind many of its smaller friends for a long time now!

i think you'll find 'de-centralisation' has failed as well... in the typical irish way...

pseudo-tech · 30-03-2009 06:42PM

sydthebeat wrote: »

i think you'll find 'de-centralisation' has failed as well... in the typical irish way...

Agreed, however we won't solve the management of the Country here!

ConfusedTech · 31-03-2009 12:17AM

pseudo-tech wrote: »

I understand the concept of the business need, to create a point of difference. However, DIT has an advantage anyway with the vast majority of our population situated around Dublin. Differentiating themselves by creating the only Degree that is accredited is neglecting all the other Technicians that dont have easy access to Dublin for family reasons etc. By not having a collective approach to this problem and by DIT being secretive will only exacerbate an already poor situation. This is unacceptable in my eyes!

Pseudo: You are right, DIT have more people around Dublin, but a point against them is that other colleges managed to get Degree courses before them, whether accredited or not! Before this issue and what is written above arose, DIT were already rewriting their own course material numerous years ago to make it a degree course. This was then altered as directed by the Bologna accords, which outlined what was and what was not a degree course and now the issue of accreditation came up, to which DIT will respond. DIT were always seeking RIAI and BIAT recognition (and had/have it). I think that they have full right to hold onto this if they wish and I would not think it secretive, although I do think that it should be rolled out across the country. When Waterford had a Degree course and DIT didnt, did they offer to give DIT the course material. I wouldnt think so! and wouldnt have expected them to.

pseudo-tech · 31-03-2009 09:42AM

ConfusedTech wrote: »

Pseudo: You are right, DIT have more people around Dublin, but a point against them is that other colleges managed to get Degree courses before them, whether accredited or not! Before this issue and what is written above arose, DIT were already rewriting their own course material numerous years ago to make it a degree course. This was then altered as directed by the Bologna accords, which outlined what was and what was not a degree course and now the issue of accreditation came up, to which DIT will respond. DIT were always seeking RIAI and BIAT recognition (and had/have it). I think that they have full right to hold onto this if they wish and I would not think it secretive, although I do think that it should be rolled out across the country. When Waterford had a Degree course and DIT didnt, did they offer to give DIT the course material. I wouldnt think so! and wouldnt have expected them to.

I appreciate that WIT were first to the post and may not have shared their information with DIT. Now DIT looks like they are going to pass them out and will not share their information. It all sounds a little bit childish to me. No wonder the Country is in the mess it is in with our academics playing GOD!

Surely, collaboration between the different Institutes will provide better graduates across the board and lead to more innovation. As mentioned this approach is unproductive.

sydthebeat · 31-03-2009 10:08AM

pseudo-tech wrote: »

I appreciate that WIT were first to the post and may not have shared their information with DIT. Now DIT looks like they are going to pass them out and will not share their information. It all sounds a little bit childish to me. No wonder the Country is in the mess it is in with our academics playing GOD!

Surely, collaboration between the different Institutes will provide better graduates across the board and lead to more innovation. As mentioned this approach is unproductive.

not necessarily.... competition is the mother of innovation, not collaboration...

if 'collaboration' was to have happen between WIT and DIT when WIT commenced their degree year... what requirement would there have been to keep progressing the courses???

as you have admitted yourself, DIT (who would have been the top course when i attended in mid 90's) fell behind to WIT due to WITs great efforts. Now DIT are trying to go one step beyond WIT with an accrediated degree course... again, all of which progresses the profession... which is what you claim to be in favour of.

If you stand still you go backwards.

No6 · 31-03-2009 10:10AM

ConfusedTech wrote: »

DIT were always seeking RIAI and BIAT recognition (and had/have it).

I'm not sure where you heard this confused RIAI recognition only for DIT. CIAT are the evil empire according to Mr Allen and he and DIT will not have anything to do with them. The RIAI will not do anything ever to further the cause of the AT.

I do however welcome the provision of the honors degree course in DIT and look forward to seeing how the part time and even better the distance learning option with recognition of Prior learning goes but without proper international professional recognition I do have to wonder is there a point to it at all. (this applies to all courses available)

pseudo-tech · 31-03-2009 10:18AM

sydthebeat wrote: »

not necessarily.... competition is the mother of innovation, not collaboration...

if 'collaboration' was to have happen between WIT and DIT when WIT commenced their degree year... what requirement would there have been to keep progressing the courses???

as you have admitted yourself, DIT (who would have been the top course when i attended in mid 90's) fell behind to WIT due to WITs great efforts. Now DIT are trying to go one step beyond WIT with an accrediated degree course... again, all of which progresses the profession... which is what you claim to be in favour of.

If you stand still you go backwards.

Valid argument. However, the student/ graduate get caught in the middle. Do we now have to wait years for WIT, CIT and LIT to catch up. It has been mentioned above that it has taken a long time (too long) for DIT to get to the position that they are in today. Its not right that a generation of graduates have to suffer!

ConfusedTech · 31-03-2009 10:19AM

I would disagree with you there Pseudo. Whether funded or not, each college or university has the right to hold onto its class materials, course materials and sylabus. They are business', and that is the reality. Each institution is trying to get in as many students as possible past their doors to increase their own course and justify its existance. It is the job of the IATGN/RIAI/CIAT/BUPA!!! US, whoever, to promote the establishing of new accreditted courses, not the college/university.

I think that you need to seperate the two, as I dont think that you fully understand the function of a college or uni, and are putting unfair requests on them.

A seperate body/committee should be/is set up to promote cross fertilisation, but this should not fall at the feet of DIT, whether driving things or not.

The other danger there is that you end up with numerous identical courses. I think the beauty of the courses previously was that there were numerous courses with different content and differing levels giving a bit of variation. Creating identical courses flies in the face of 3rd level academia, where each college or university is meant be try to be the leader in their area. Thats what fuels research and progress... All the others should be spurred on to move and make something better than DIT. That is where we all stand to win.

armchairninja · 31-03-2009 10:24AM

No6 wrote: »

I'm not sure where you heard this confused RIAI recognition only for DIT. CIAT are the evil empire according to Mr Allen and he and DIT will not have anything to do with them.

Wouldnt be so sure about that particular comment, all the studios in DIT have a CIAT information board, which is regularly updated with literature, also, I, as were all students in my class, was encouraged to join them as a student member at the first chance I got, as it would only further me as a professional etc, I think the reason that they seek the RIAI recognition, is that at present, sadly, it is the main body for all things architecture, even technology, so it is only natural to go for the "best" is it not? Not to be bringing up the old CIAT v IATGN v RIAI debate again, but that must be the reason why RIAI recog. is so sought after, because for years they were the only ones...

ConfusedTech · 31-03-2009 10:27AM

No6 wrote: »

ConfusedTech wrote: »

DIT were always seeking RIAI and BIAT recognition (and had/have it).

I'm not sure where you heard this confused RIAI recognition only for DIT. CIAT are the evil empire according to Mr Allen and he and DIT will not have anything to do with them. The RIAI will not do anything ever to further the cause of the AT.

It was always part of the course to get RIAI and CIAT recognition and their stamp of approval on the course throughout the country. This is why they, the RIAI, visited the student exhibition each year and the CIAT were invited, is it not! I used the past tense on that statement though for a reason.

Also, please separate Cormac's statements within the IATGN and for the DIT. My understanding is that the course will always have to get the thumbs up from the RIAI as the governing body of Architecture in the country until our own is set up!?!?!?!?

sydthebeat · 31-03-2009 10:35AM

pseudo-tech wrote: »

Valid argument. However, the student/ graduate get caught in the middle. Do we now have to wait years for WIT, CIT and LIT to catch up. It has been mentioned above that it has taken a long time (too long) for DIT to get to the position that they are in today. Its not right that a generation of graduates have to suffer!

I understand this, and im see where your arguments are coming from.
But unfortunately i cant see a practical alternative in our particular sociology.

Arrakis · 31-03-2009 11:00AM

Hi
I was at Cormac's presentation...alot of work put in and with luck, it'll take hold. He (& department) will be cherry picking who will have access to these new courses, which brought back memories (personally) of the blinkered attitute that existed in Bolton Street when I tried to return to it in the early 90's...but that's another story.

If we (AT's) sit around waiting for further development to just happen then we're fooling ourselves. DIT should be shouting out loud about these new courses, releasing data to the IATGN to issue to its members and seeking support from the CIAT. My advise, join the CIAT study the POP's and use your years of experience to further yourselves.

On a final note, I was really shocked when entering DIT for the 1st time in years. It could do with a bit of a clean, dare I say it, upgrading. I mean for a college so support by the RIAI, it really showed it! So one can only imagion how orginized & supported they really are behind the scenes. Its no wounder WIT and others are spring boarding ahead.

archtech · 31-03-2009 11:02AM

I don't have a great issue with DIT keeping their information to themselves, until the course is up and running, however, if DIT's course is going to be the benchmark for entry / membership or is the sole educational establishment to permit automatic entry to ATI when the time comes and graduates of other courses are restricted then there's a problem.

DIT's level 8 qualification should see it accredited with CIAT,( if they apply for accreditation of course) I was of the understanding that WIT were in the process of getting their level 8 accredited, however I don't know what stage it is at present.

As for DIT or anywhere else getting the thumbs up from the RIAI, as I understand it, the RIAI will only give a course the thumbs up, if they are happy with the content of the course and the course contains what the RIAI want to see in it. It is up to the individual educational establishment to pursue the RIAI for approval not the other way round as it is with CIAT. and most properly will be with ATI.

No6 · 31-03-2009 11:07AM

armchairninja wrote: »

Wouldnt be so sure about that particular comment, all the studios in DIT have a CIAT information board, which is regularly updated with literature, also, I, as were all students in my class, was encouraged to join them as a student member at the first chance I got, as it would only further me as a professional etc, I think the reason that they seek the RIAI recognition, is that at present, sadly, it is the main body for all things architecture, even technology, so it is only natural to go for the "best" is it not? Not to be bringing up the old CIAT v IATGN v RIAI debate again, but that must be the reason why RIAI recog. is so sought after, because for years they were the only ones...

Pretty much a direct quote to be honest armchair, if DIT and or any other course were so keen on professional recognition they would have recognition from both the RIAI and CIAT or at least be working towards it and engaging with both bodies. The fact that they don't speaks volumes to me, some have recognition from one others from none. Having an information board and getting recognition for a course are two entirely different things. Perhaps in these difficult times all the courses might realise that any improvement they make in terms of professional recognition while ultimately benefitting their graduates will also benefit the course too in terms of how it is percieved by prospective students.

Confused it wasnt a statement made within the IATGN as I am not on any IATGN comittee so it dosn't need any seperation to my mind. It was expressed by the DIT course leader as DIT policy and I have to say I was truly horrified when I heard it.

I'm not bringing up the old one aganist the other debate again, I'm a member of all and support any and all positive moves to improve our profession and institutional blinkers will not help at's in the long term.

pseudo-tech · 31-03-2009 11:34AM

armchairninja wrote: »

Wouldnt be so sure about that particular comment, all the studios in DIT have a CIAT information board, which is regularly updated with literature...

I believe that the information boards in DIT are paid for by the CIAT

ConfusedTech wrote: »

Also, please separate Cormac's statements within the IATGN and for the DIT.

I can't understand how we can do that. We have corporate governance problems here in Ireland with different directors working on different boards and that has certainly been called into question. I would certainly call Cormac's role on the IATGN into question at this stage taking on board his agenda in relation to DIT and his membership on the Technician committee within the RIAI. Too much control for my liking

Arrakis wrote: »

Hi
I was at Cormac's presentation...alot of work put in and with luck, it'll take hold. He (& department) will be cherry picking who will have access to these new courses, which brought back memories (personally) of the blinkered attitute that existed in Bolton Street when I tried to return to it in the early 90's...but that's another story.

Syd. This is the third poster who feel that the applicants will be cherry picked. Where is the fairness here?? I feel that we are being used as pawns in the academic game and the personal promotion of those academics

archtech wrote: »

I don't have a great issue with DIT keeping their information to themselves, until the course is up and running, however, if DIT's course is going to be the benchmark for entry / membership or is the sole educational establishment to permit automatic entry to ATI when the time comes and graduates of other courses are restricted then there's a problem.

This is a point that reared its head during a number of the IATGN discussions. I appreciate its not in place yet but the IATGN were certainly suggesting that the level 8 Degree would be the benchmark for entry into ATI. When challenged they suggested that experience would be looked at later but initially they would start with the Degree as an entry requirement. Now if we have to wait for them to implement this like we have waited for the I.T.s to set up adequate courses, we will be waiting a long time.

archtech wrote: »

DIT's level 8 qualification should see it accredited with CIAT,( if they apply for accreditation of course) I was of the understanding that WIT were in the process of getting their level 8 accredited, however I don't know what stage it is at present.

I believe that the WIT course was acceptable for recognition by CIAT but they were asked to hold off until DIT had their course in place.

No6 wrote: »

Pretty much a direct quote to be honest armchair, if DIT and or any other course were so keen on professional recognition they would have recognition from both the RIAI and CIAT or at least be working towards it and engaging with both bodies. The fact that they don't speaks volumes to me, some have recognition from one others from none. Having an information board and getting recognition for a course are two entirely different things. Perhaps in these difficult times all the courses might realise that any improvement they make in terms of professional recognition while ultimately benefitting their graduates will also benefit the course too in terms of how it is percieved by prospective students.

Confused it wasnt a statement made within the IATGN as I am not on any IATGN comittee so it dosn't need any seperation to my mind. It was expressed by the DIT course leader as DIT policy and I have to say I was truly horrified when I heard it.

I'm not bringing up the old one aganist the other debate again, I'm a member of all and support any and all positive moves to improve our profession and institutional blinkers will not help at's in the long term.

I really cannot add to No.6. Synopsis. Well done!!!!

ConfusedTech · 31-03-2009 11:45AM

No6 wrote: »

Confused it wasnt a statement made within the IATGN as I am not on any IATGN comittee so it dosn't need any seperation to my mind. It was expressed by the DIT course leader as DIT policy and I have to say I was truly horrified when I heard it.

Wow! I am quiet surprised at that. A lot has obviously changed for him to take that stance.

Archtech, I dont think that the entry criteria will be dictated or benchmarked by DIT for the IAT, and it should not be, but if it is the first course set up, it may seem that way. I cant see the IAT stopping people from entry at the beginning. They will have to build their numbers.

Although I agree that courses should get teh thumbs up from the various institutions, I stand by what I have said before:
RIAI: An architectural institute that has the right to serve its members as priority. Its main focus is on architects and not technicians and rightly so. SHould they be the governing body, well thats another days posting!

CIAT: Very good at what they do for Techs in the UK, but not an Irish organisation. I have no issues with the UK, or English people, but I dont think representation from an organisation outside the country is in our interest.

IBCI: Could be a very good springboard for Techies, as we have a lot in common. This organisation could get a lot from us, and we could give a lot to them. An odd, but very good synergy.

ATI: Still the only answer if you want proper and professional representation. Full Stop. Why do people keep beating around the bush!!!

muffler · 31-03-2009 01:44PM

Can we keep this on topic please.

muffler · 31-03-2009 04:01PM

I have tidied this up as best I could by moving 21 posts to the ATI thread.

Anyone wishing to discuss the DIT follow on courses in this thread is more than welcome but Im saying this for the last time - dragging or attempt to drag this thread off topic again will result in a ban.

fatchops · 31-03-2009 05:08PM

Arrakis wrote: »

On a final note, I was really shocked when entering DIT for the 1st time in years. It could do with a bit of a clean, dare I say it, upgrading. I mean for a college so support by the RIAI, it really showed it! So one can only imagion how orginized & supported they really are behind the scenes. Its no wounder WIT and others are spring boarding ahead.

Longford house was no pretty picture

treviesweets · 01-04-2009 09:41PM

I don't see why you are all getting so excited about a level 8 course. In my eyes, anyone with enough experience should be skipping the level 8 and heading straight into a masters.

ConfusedTech · 01-04-2009 10:09PM

treviesweets wrote: »

I don't see why you are all getting so excited about a level 8 course. In my eyes, anyone with enough experience should be skipping the level 8 and heading straight into a masters.

I think that the issue is that ATs deserve to get this qualification after leaving college and have been fighting for it for years. If you measure up the amount of work done!

To top it off, due to recent amendments in banks and certification, the course needs to be! I wouldnt want to have to go and do a masters after I finished my AT course in order to join an institution, certify etc!

treviesweets · 01-04-2009 10:38PM

ConfusedTech wrote: »

I think that the issue is that ATs deserve to get this qualification after leaving college and have been fighting for it for years. If you measure up the amount of work done!

To top it off, due to recent amendments in banks and certification, the course needs to be! I wouldn't want to have to go and do a masters after I finished my AT course in order to join an institution, certify etc!

Fair point, I hadn't really thought about the practicalities, was just a bit worried that maybe some people might be selling themselves short. I guess anyone going back to it should be hoping to get some exemptions anyways, although I know the mature students in my class had a fair struggle.

I know this is a bit off topic but has anyone looked into the CIOB for certification rights? They brought out this 'pathways' thing recently, where u can become a full member through experience.

topcatcbr · 02-04-2009 01:35PM

treviesweets wrote: »

Fair point, I hadn't really thought about the practicalities, was just a bit worried that maybe some people might be selling themselves short. I guess anyone going back to it should be hoping to get some exemptions anyways, although I know the mature students in my class had a fair struggle.

I know this is a bit off topic but has anyone looked into the CIOB for certification rights? They brought out this 'pathways' thing recently, where u can become a full member through experience.

I was looking into this reciently and went to their seminar on this in IT Tallaght. Basically you undertake to do 60 Credits at level 8 in an IT or Do the EPA (Experienced Practicioneer Route) which involves doing a short course to bring you up to Level 8 equivelent. The latter is very Project Manager based and not really suitable for us IMO. The firse option can be done through any IT Uni offering it. I know CIT does.

DIT 4th year follow on course

Comments