I don't disagree that they have work to do. They know they have work to do. What takes so long, I have no idea.
I know we've seen posts about problems with instructors. I can't disagree there either. My own CEH instructor was horrible when I took the course. The guys recognized as Master Instructors that I know, are good at what they do and I'd happily sit in their course. How many are out there? Not a clue. Are there some designated as Master Instructors that truly don't know what they're doing? Again, I'm not sure but it wouldn't surprise me. We all know that the experience and ability of the instructor can easily make or break a class though.
On the iLabs, we recently had a report on this portal about the failure of iLabs. They work, but it appears by report to be put together very poorly. Can you tell us about how it worked when you tested it? (NOTE: I see you replied to that post, not knocking your efforts, the poster said the labs appeared to work, but just not intuitively. I'll quote the relevant portion for those who havent seen the thread)
The same can be said for the iLabs - to call it "unpolished" would be kind. Basically, you log in and reserve time in 2-3 hour blocks. The system creates a virtual lab environment for you on their network from which you can run their Bible-sized (both Old & New Testament) book of lab "exercises". The exercises themselves are basically just a very (very, very) simplistic execution of the myriad of tools accompanied by screen shots. For example, they'll have you install Cain and attempt to crack a password file but it really amounts to click here, now click here, okay, now click here. Done! There are no targets per se, just 3-4 different platforms you can run the different tools on. And there are no end-to-end exercises.
My experience with iLabs was similar to what DragonGorge posted. Keep in mind I went through this about a year ago before iLabs was actually rolled out so I don't know if anything has changed (and it's hard to remember all the details).
You basically access the system and reserve a block of time for doing your labs. The system then configures your virtual network for use. It consists of several different systems - I want to say 5 but I can't remember what all they were (Windows 2008, Windows 7, BackTrack and there may have been a second 2008 box).
The instructions are similar to what was pointed out. At the beginning they give you some type of overview or scenario about when/why you might use the tool(s) in the lab. You are then told about the environment and which systems you will be using for the lab (W2K8, W7, BT, etc.). After that it walks you step-by-step through installing and running the tool. As DragonGorge mentioned, the labs only go so deep into the tool. They get you up and running and show you the basic functionality - it's left to you to explore the tool in greater detail and play within the lab. I believe they add some 'additional tasks' at the end of the lab or ask you questions about using the tool in other scenarios. Again, this is where it's up to the student to go the extra distance and do these tasks.
If there are any targets required, the lab will tell you that you need multiple machines and you will use one to attack the other (e.g., the BT system attacking the W2K8 system). There are no end-to-end exercises as pointed out but probably should be.
When working through the lab guides, there were spelling/grammar mistakes, wrong names of virtual systems, wrong systems selected, or stuff that just didn't work. I fixed the simple spelling/grammar errors, renamed the virtual systems (apparently the systems in the class are slightly different than iLabs, which would certainly cause confusion), and basically made sure the lab worked. If there were missing instructions I would add them or if something wasn't needed I removed it. For a couple of labs, I remember rewriting large portions. I wasn't responsible for creating or selecting the labs, just making sure they worked.
When I was finished and turned everything back into ECC, everything was accurate and worked fine. What happened after that (whether they accepted all my changes, changed systems, changed/added labs), I have no idea.