I imagine it would be more useful to someone new to arboriculture, who doesn't necessarily have prior experience of tree identification, tree science and basically the arb theory. Indeed most the people on the course have come direct from school or from unrelated backgrounds.
Personally I'm finding it a bit basic to be honest. I guess that having studied ecology and then worked for a bit, I've picked a fair bit of background knowledge. More importantly, I've wanted to know as much as I could about trees, so I was motivated to read the books and see what I could find. In this way I already had a good idea about different tree species and how to ID them, as well as doing Visual Tree Assessments. It definitely helped working as a ranger somewhere where I could go out and look at the trees and compile my own personal notes on them.
I'm not saying I know it all, or that it's a waste of time, and I certainly don't want to come across as having an enormous ego - I'm just saying that given a few years of working in a related discipline and having a personal interest in the subject, it's relatively easy to accumulate a similar or greater knowledge of the theory side of arb than can be attained doing this kind of qualification.
The other thing I'm finding is that the resources we're being directed to in college often give more information than the actual classes. In this way it's possibly a better option to study it by distance learning, as information sources could be collected from tutors and then accessed by the student. Certainly I'm now thinking that I'll look more for conservation/arboriculture jobs and try to complete the course by distance learning. A change of heart given that one reason I decided to do a full-time ND as opposed to a day-release AA Tech was that I thought that devoting time to the course would yield better results. However, doing the full-time ND is certainly useful for the practical side of arb - I think we're being given better tuition at a steadier rate than if just doing CS38 and CS39 short courses.
So... good books to look up that give in-depth information if carrying out private research into arb:
1. Modern Arboriculture by Alex Shigo (a recent Christmas present and near enough a Bible on Arboriculture; it's not just scientific, but philosophical and practical too)
2. Stupsi Explains the Tree by Claus Mattheck (sounds basic but I believe anyone starting out in tree body language should read this - honestly. It gives a great guide to all the different ways that a tree silently shows us what is going on inside it)
3. The Body Language of Trees by Mattheck & Breloer (this builds on what Stupsi Explains the Tree intoduces - a great help with VTA)
4. A Manual of Wood Decay in Trees by Weber & Mattheck (explanations of different types of rot and a guide to the commoner decay fungi - pretty indispensable!)
5. Diagnosis of Ill Health in Trees by Strouts & Winter (perhaps a bit in-depth at first but using it to look up different diseases one comes across really helps to improve knowledge)
