That junior-to-senior gap shows up fast, and module 4 dragged a bit on ETABS UI clicks; also, the labs assume you’ve already got load templates set up. After that, it clicked. The section where the instructor walks through IS 456 load combinations and then flips to ETABS to show why the response spectrum case changes column sizes stuck with me. Seeing the stair core modeled as a semi-rigid diaphragm, not just lines, tied theory to what I see in prod drawings. I’ve been cross-checking the calc sheets against our arch assumptions and catching issues earlier in PRs. It’s nudged my mental model past “follow the code” into “predict the behavior,” in a way docs never did.

Load combinations walkthrough in Chapter 4 using IS 456 in ETABS was useful; difficulty tagging's confusing—it's not beginner, mostly advanced.