Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the deceptive practices of training institutions that lure students with promises of "learn first, pay later" schemes, which often result in financial burdens rather than educational benefits [1][2][3]. Group 1: Deceptive Practices - Many training institutions advertise courses with claims of earning potential while studying, but these claims are often false, leading students to incur debts without receiving promised income [1][2]. - Students report that the quality of courses is poor, with many being pre-recorded sessions lacking real-time interaction with instructors, which diminishes the learning experience [2][3]. Group 2: Contractual Issues - When students attempt to withdraw from courses, they are often faced with high penalties and fees, such as being required to pay 10% of the total course fee despite minimal attendance [2][3]. - Training institutions often employ vague terms in contracts that place excessive responsibility on students while limiting their rights, which may render such clauses legally invalid [3][4]. Group 3: Financial Misrepresentation - Some institutions misrepresent payment structures, disguising loans as "learn first, pay later" arrangements, leading students to unknowingly incur significant debt [3][4]. - There is a lack of transparency regarding the financial agreements, with students often unaware that they are signing financial loan contracts [4]. Group 4: Challenges in Consumer Protection - Consumers face significant challenges in seeking redress, including information asymmetry, difficulty in providing evidence of misleading practices, and complex legal processes [4]. - The article suggests that regulatory gaps exist in the oversight of educational financial services, calling for stricter scrutiny and enforcement to protect consumers [4].

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the importance of carefully selecting design training institutions, highlighting the need for practical evaluation methods such as trial classes and updated course content to ensure quality education and employment support [4][5][6]. Group 1: Selection Criteria for Design Training Institutions - Trial classes are crucial; they allow potential students to assess the teaching style and content delivery of instructors, which is more informative than just reviewing course outlines [4]. - The relevance and recency of course content are essential; institutions should teach the latest software versions and design trends to ensure students are job-ready [4][5]. - Employment support should be substantial, including portfolio guidance, mock interviews, and genuine job placement assistance rather than just promotional slogans [5]. Group 2: Advantages of Online Learning - Online design training offers flexibility in time and location, making it accessible for individuals with busy schedules or those transitioning careers [5]. - A broader selection of instructors is available online, allowing students to learn from experienced professionals in the industry [5]. - Online courses often provide better value for money, as they eliminate commuting costs and typically have lower tuition fees [5]. Group 3: Success Stories and Outcomes - A case study of a student who transitioned from an administrative role to a UI design position illustrates the effectiveness of online training, achieving a job offer with a salary of over 9K after completing a course [6]. - The reported employment rate for graduates from a specific online institution is approximately 95%, with most salaries ranging from 8K to 15K, indicating a strong job market for trained designers [6].