employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Langsford Learning Acceleration Centers

Is this your company?

Langsford Learning Acceleration Centers Reviews

4.3

88% would recommend to a friend

(5 total reviews)

88% positive business outlook

Reviews by job title

5 reviews
3.0
14 Nov 2018

Instructor

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Very rewarding working with students using a program that does work.

Cons

Low pay with very infrequent increases. Owner is not very interested in input from employees, and is content to deal with high turnover rather than making it worthwhile to stay

1.0
12 Jan 2016
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

You supposedly get an opportunity to help children with learning disabilities. That said, the session I sat in on was concerning. The child/client had significant learning disabilities and other developmental issues that were not being covered in our training. The instructor was worn out -- I assume from working with similar clients all day long -- and unable to keep the child's attention. The session ended when the child randomly stood up and walked out of the room. The tutor looked at me and gave an exasperated shrug. Though I only got to spend 20 or so minutes with the child, I got the impression that she needed help beyond what Langsford had to offer. I asked the tutor if many of the children's situations were as severe, and she said said no. I asked the tutor if she felt the child made progress during that session, and she said it's complicated but yes. I asked if clients worked with the same tutor each time they came in, and the tutor said no it's whatever tutor with a certain training level is available. I am not saying Langsford doesn't help it's clients. I am saying I did not witness a clearly effective session. Despite the chaos of the session and its questionable results, it actually did make me want to stick with the ridiculous training in hopes of being able to help this little girl and others.

Cons

This is long, but if you are considering working for this company I recommend reading it ... There are/were 28 hours of classroom training. You were supposed to be paid $175 upon completion of this training. There were about a eight hires in my class. The training was an unorganized waste of time. The first day it was revealed that in addition to the 28 hours of classroom training, there would be a couple hours of take home training every night. Older, more experienced job seekers were able to recognize the sham quicker than myself, and two of the eight did not return the second day. Even more dropped of the next. When I left, there was only one other trainee remaining and he was young, green, recent college grad like myself. We were past 28 hours of in-class training, we had not received $175, and management was unwilling to say how many more hours of training were required (they estimated six more hours). I arranged a meeting with the executive director (who was in charge of hiring), to discuss what how this could be resolved. We were to meet early in the morning, before training started. He did not arrive the day we were to meet, so I sat through another day of training. The next day I showed up again, sat down in their lobby, and said I was waiting until the executive director arrived. Front desk called and let him know. He showed up and hour or two later. During this meeting, I mentioned that I needed to receive in writing the hourly wage I was quoted during the interview process, $13. He said he would need to check with someone or something before doing so. I then brought up that the $175 for training was for 28 hours, and that I'd like to be compensated accordingly for the extra hours. He refused, saying that even though the training is supposed to be 28 hours, the $175 is for up to 34 hours. This had never been mentioned before. To lessen the blow, he told me I would receive 20 hours of work a week after training. I was young and dumb, and was unwilling to just call the 30ish hours I had already invested in training a bust. Because the amount of training left was undetermined, I asked if he could agree to pay $5.15 an hour (175/34) for however many hours of training ended up being required. He agreed. I said I'd follow up with email so we could have this all in writing. He was visibly taken aback when I said this. I sent him the email after the meeting with the discussed terms in writing, and he replied back that he actually could not agree to the terms we discussed. He said I actually could receive as little as four hours a week at two hours a day. His email did not address at all the $5.15/hour for training mentioned in my email. His email said he apologized about quoting $13 during the interview process; they would actually be paying me $12.50 an hour. I have all these specific details years later because I have kept the emails. I replied back he could begin paying me $12.50 hourly tomorrow -- no matter if they had me working or doing more training -- or it just wasn’t a good fit. He agreed it wasn’t a good fit. I never received a dollar of the $175, despite having completed at least 28 hours of training.

avatar
Langsford Learning Acceleration Centers Response
9y
Glassdoor recommends responding to negative reviews with a balanced response; I take full responsibility for what is true in this reviewer’s experience, and no responsibility for what’s not true nor how the reviewer's approach impacted his experience negatively. I contacted Glassdoor to insist many of this reviewers’ claims were not true. And I understand their response, “we cannot be the ones who decide what’s true and what is not”. My final contact was to make this review clearer to current readers. Glassdoor felt no changes were necessary. 1. 4 years later. This review was posted 1/2016,. The actual events were Mar/April 2012. This is not a review of our current training/hiring process. 2. Never an employee. This reviewer never completed the training, and therefore was not hired. The Truth For over 16 yrs, Langsford has been providing meaningful part time work for people seeking part time work in this field. The training is necessary and it is our final hiring step. At the time in 2010-2012, there were many people out of work and we were trying to resolve a problem; People would join our training class, get paid for a week of training, and then leave. They mostly left for a full time job opportunity during training or within weeks. This created havoc on our schedule. It happened a few too many times, so we came up with a plan to compensate instructor candidates a nominal amount for completing the training. We had to lower the dollar amount to ensure those who accepted our invitation to training were really interested in becoming a reading instructor. This revised pay structure did work, until it didn't. We retired that training compensation plan 3 years ago. This reviewer knew he was getting paid $175 to complete our training class and that our Minimum Requirements document listed part time hours of 6-12/week. This can be found on our web site under the Cincinnati link of the Job Opportunities page. After the first day of training (a Monday) this reviewer emailed me and said he had a problem with the $175 to complete the training and a concern about the number of hours he would get after training. He ask me to meet him in the morning before the second day of training, and I did. His complaint was that I communicated 28 hours of classroom training and then 6 hours of observations and team session work, but didn't mentioned the reading homework. I apologized for that. The length of time the actual classroom training was, was a challenge. We can only go as fast as the slowest instructor candidate can go. At the time, I did think this reviewer’s concerns were mostly resolved, because he continued on to the training that day (Tuesday). Tuesday night, this reviewer emailed me again and said if I would pay him $12.50 for all training hours and commit to 20 hours a week for him after training, he would continue with the training. I responded that this is not a good fit for either of us. This was the end of his final email to me…. “Jeff...I hope you can understand why I have come to this decision. The minimum requirements do say an employee could receive as little as 4 hours a week, but it also describes the training as 25 hours (not sure why he wrote 25 hours when everywhere else it’s 28 hours) over the course of a week. I believe I would be a fantastic employee at Langsford. If Langsford believes the same, I need a commitment in return. If there is a real job for me at the end of the tunnel, 12.50 an hour for training should be worth your while. If not, I am sorry it worked out this way." He clearly wanted to negotiate a different training pay for himself after the training had already started, and a set number of hours once training had finished. This had never happened before and I took this as a red flag. Items that are Not true in this Review - as the reviewer, I also have all the emails. This reviewer didn’t complete the training, therefore was never an employee – Yet claims he sat in on a session. (We work with children. We cannot have non-employees, not covered by our insurance, in session). Email dates show he only completed 2 days of the training - Yet he claims he completed 28 hours of training. He claims I did not show up to a meeting – Yet his email afterwards starts; “Hi Jeff, This is a follow up to our brief meeting this morning. We discussed the base rate of $175 dollars for 28 classroom hours…” It's very strange to me that we were very cordial during this very quick 2 day email, meeting, email exchange...Then 4 years later he posts a review. If you are interested in a part time job at Langsford doing meaningful work, please read our Minimum Requirements document on our Job Opportunities page, Cincinnati link.
Viewing 1 - 3 of 5 Reviews

Glassdoor has 5 Langsford Learning Acceleration Centers reviews submitted anonymously by Langsford Learning Acceleration Centers employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Langsford Learning Acceleration Centers is right for you.