EYardstick vs. McGraw-Hill Connect

After using EYardstick, we have been able to ensure the candidates I hire are of a high enough calibre to perform at or above expectations.

Content is pretty good, and site is good as standalone tool, but it does not integrate will with any LMS. Grade pass back does not work with Google Classroom or Skyward (unsure about Power School or others) SSO works with Clever, but not Google, so students always have to go through Clever and cannot go directly from Google Classroom to an assignment, even if you posted to Google Classroom through the Connect portal. Problem sets are robust, but difficult to edit and assessments are designed to be web based. Formatting is poor when trying to print assessments that were created online.

Incentivized

• Coding simulators with pre-built questions for many roles.
• Wide variety of topics in software testing space.
• Availability of questions on niche topics like BDD, Cucumber, etc.

• Integration with Canvas is seamless and easy to use.
• Assignment completion, for students, is straightforward and easy to use.
• The SmartBook allows students to read as they are tested with questions and this helps them learn the material easily without having first trying to read, memorize a chapter and then answer questions.

Incentivized

• No AIML elements yet, I would like to see it very soon from EYardstick.

• McGraw-Hill Connect could do a better job of staying current and making sure all of its videos and references to real-scenarios are up to date.
• It can do a better job of immediate explanation or advice when an answer is incorrect.
• It can improve upon its ability to autosave assignments. If an internet connection gets buggy and kicks the user out of the system, sometimes the assignment progress will be lost. This is because to save the assignment, it takes you out of the assignment and doesn't just autosave.

Incentivized

The product will do a majority of what they claim. Your experience will vary depending on how much you love or hate the implementation. The tools are there, but there is a learning curve as people get accommodated to how interaction is expected to be conducted (as opposed to more personal means).

Incentivized

I frankly didn't have to interact much as the tool was very much self explaining. The account manager I deal with is good as she calls regularly to check on how things are going and if any help is needed from EYardstick's end.

Personally, I did not encounter McGraw-Hill support. However, I worked with colleagues who needed support and were able to receive in a timely manner. Overall, McGraw Hill Connect is user-friendly (at least from teacher interface) and easy to navigate, which minimizes the need to reach out for support. The help button is useful and provides plenty of immediate support.

Incentivized

HirePro was more service oriented than product oriented. EYardstick had a lot of self help and very easy for a novice to pick and start using it. Most of the features are self explanatory. Also our demand was to cater to a wide variety of job roles. EYardstick helped us in assessments for BPO hiring to typing tests to core IT exams with 360 degree proctoring solution.

Much of our lecture material comes from McGraw-Hill, so it was an opportunity to marry the learning material to a collaborative system that can make the experience more portable and potentially more affordable for our students. The workings are managed off-site so we do not need to care for it on a daily basis.

Incentivized

• Product is licensed per test.
• Pricing is transparent.

• Wasted valuable time trying to figure out the "eBook."
• Did not receive good value for the money spent.
• Did not feel as though the company was interested in keeping me satisfied as a customer, or like their customer service was actually interested in solving any problems.