you know those question BEFORE the exam....
Gerry
areas
(eg. how would you rate your knowledge of FrameRelay).
Are those question in any way related to the actual exam???
The reason I'm asking:
a couple of weeks ago I answered all this questions saying "yeah I'm the
king" (sort of)
and failed the CIT. I've taken it again this morning and passed (pretty easy
questions compared to the first exam)
This time I answered all the question saying "I've no f&$'n idea what this
is about".
Anyone a similar experience?
And where do this 300 points come from. remember?
They say: passing score 776 (on a scale of 300 to 1000)
strange isn't it?
any comment welcome
cheers
Gerry
Bernie
>where they ask you about your confidence within the different networking
>areas
>(eg. how would you rate your knowledge of FrameRelay).
>
>Are those question in any way related to the actual exam???
Not in the sense you are asking.
>The reason I'm asking:
>a couple of weeks ago I answered all this questions saying "yeah I'm the
>king" (sort of)
>and failed the CIT. I've taken it again this morning and passed (pretty easy
>questions compared to the first exam)
>This time I answered all the question saying "I've no f&$'n idea what this
>is about".
Then you just happen to have a strange set of knowledge/experience
that made one exam seem easier than the other. The difficulty is
supposed to be equal among exams.
I *do* know what those questions are for though. They have no impact
on your score or anything. What they do is allow Cisco to asses after
the fact whether or not you should have passed or failed the exam.
This allows them to gather statistics and determine whether they made
the exam too easy or too difficult. If too many "networking gods" are
failing, then they need to lower the passing score or remove some of
the questions that all the gods seem to be getting wrong. The
converse is true too.
>Anyone a similar experience?
>And where do this 300 points come from. remember?
>They say: passing score 776 (on a scale of 300 to 1000)
>strange isn't it?
I don't know where the 300 comes from exactly (other than checking in
at the desk), but I can assure you it has nothing to do with those
confidence questions.
--Bernie
freak
The test itself is simply not dynamic in nature to use those questions
in the way you describe :)
---
View this thread: http://www.examnotes.net/article85462.html
freak - Moderator
------------------------------------------------------------------------
freak's Profile: http://www.examnotes.net/forums/member.php?action=getinfo&userid=1778
nick
chance that the test can be created based on your answers to the
survey questions. with them before, there is a natural assumption
that how you answer the survey will affect what questions you get,
even if that is not the case. just my $0.02
-nick
Bernie <Ber...@weekend.com> wrote in message news:<49E2091344C07EE7.CEC64BC1...@lp.airnews.net>...
Bernie
>so then why dont they put the survey at the end? this way there is no
>chance that the test can be created based on your answers to the
>survey questions. with them before, there is a natural assumption
>that how you answer the survey will affect what questions you get,
>even if that is not the case. just my $0.02
I've taken some exams where they *are* at the end. On one hand you
make a good point about the questions being at the end, but on the
other hand, if you put them at the end, people rush through and check
the first answer they see just so they can get to see their score
ASAP. That doesn't lead to a valid survey either.
I'd also have to say that if a person *seriously* thinks that they
will get an easier exam by saying they are a rank newbie, then they
aren't even at the level of human intelligence--lower primate is more
like it. Those people shouldn't be passing at all. Like Cisco would
want newbies to have an easier time passing just because they are
newbies--chaaa, right.
--Bernie
Bob Smith
dumb. In other words, I lie. This is a waste of my time. I came to
take the test, not to assist a bankrupt method of assessing competancy
be tweeked for improvement. Revolution not evolution.
Has anyone really read through the lengthy legalese information you
have to agree to before you can procede to the test questions? Well, I
haven't. We all know what its about. Curiously, I noticed for my last
test that the legalese crap is actually part of the test. Test time
begins ticking away before you agree. Sure, go ahead, read the whole
thing. Make sure you know what your agreeing to. Tick-tick, tick-tick,
tick-tick................
Hansang Bae
@yahoo.com says...
[snip]
> Has anyone really read through the lengthy legalese information you
> have to agree to before you can procede to the test questions? Well, I
> haven't.
So that's why you haven't paid me, eh? In there, you'll find that everyone
who takes a test must pay me $50USD (via paypal). What can I say..it's the
law!
--
hsb
"Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
*************** USE ROT13 TO SEE MY EMAIL ADDRESS ****************
********************************************************************
Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not not be able to
reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
********************************************************************
Tom MacIntyre
>In article <8678389f.0212...@posting.google.com>, wysiwyg21
>@yahoo.com says...
>[snip]
>> Has anyone really read through the lengthy legalese information you
>> have to agree to before you can procede to the test questions? Well, I
>> haven't.
>
>So that's why you haven't paid me, eh? In there, you'll find that everyone
>who takes a test must pay me $50USD (via paypal). What can I say..it's the
>law!
Missing smiley? :-)
Tom
Bernie
>Regarding those surveys that preface tests ( Cisco ), I always play
>dumb. In other words, I lie. This is a waste of my time. I came to
>take the test, not to assist a bankrupt method of assessing competancy
>be tweeked for improvement. Revolution not evolution.
If you want revolution then how come you are taking the tests? That
is not a typical revolutionary's stance. Revolutionaries overturn the
system by abhorring it and disregarding it, not playing the system in
hopes of changing it from within. That would be an evolutionist's
tactic.
Despite what you say, you are not a revolutionist. If I'm not
mistaken you have posted similar comments before. Hey, I am not
necessarily trying to defend the system--I just dislike false
pretenses and have little respect for people that call for others to
revolt on their behalf while not taking action themselves: "Ok, you
guys revolt and overturn the system...meanwhile, I'll be over here
with my number 2 pencil taking my little test so I can benefit from
the system that I am telling you is so egregious..." Could you
imagine the Boston teaparty'er who actually went back to his home
behind closed doors and secretly paid his taxes so that the redcoats
wouldn't come knocking on *his* door, or William Wallace playing both
sides of the fence by secretly paying tribute to Longshanks while
telling his countrymen how terrible Longshanks was? Real men put
their money where their mouth is.
Despite what I think of the system, I would never call for a
revolution I wasn't prepared to take part in. So be a man and revolt
if you are going to call for revolution. Be first in line to not take
the tests. Do it at personal cost--that is what revolution is all
about. Revolution is not about being some sniveling little weasel
that takes the exams, advances their career on the backs of
certification programs, and then calls for the dismantling of the same
(meanwhile continuing to take those exams thinking that lying on the
questionnaire is doing their part in "the great cause"). That is what
Benedict Arnold is all about, not John Hancock.
Pathetic, really...
--Bernie
Bob Smith
not evolution"? No more historical references, please. I like
pretense. False pretense more so. I love rhetoric. Now that we are
completely off the subject, are you having fun yet?
X -Eliminator
Bernie
<blalb...@aohell.com> wrote:
>It looks like Bernie likes to hear himself talk. blablalbla...
Hmmm...kinda like you like to hear yourself talk **endlessly** about
cars (and cellphones). Gee, I outgrew that pre-pubescent phase, what
twenty years ago? Grow up.
>On 13 Dec 2002 13:50:10 -0800, wysi...@yahoo.com (Bob Smith) wrote:
>>Bernie, would it make you feel better if I had said "reconstruction
>>not evolution"? No more historical references, please. I like
>>pretense. False pretense more so. I love rhetoric. Now that we are
>>completely off the subject, are you having fun yet?
--Bernie
Bernie
>I love rhetoric.
Obviously so, with comments like "...not to assist a bankrupt method
of assessing competency..." and "revolution not evolution."
Rhetoric begets rhetoric, so if you don't want it in return, don't
start with it. Or if you do truly love it then you are having as much
fun as I.
--Bernie
freak
Bernie wrote:
> * Like Cisco would
> want newbies to have an easier time passing just because they are
> newbies--chaaa, right.
LOL :) That's a good one!
Hansang Bae
In article <lbeivusgvjj8cm9p6...@4ax.com>,
tom__ma...@hotmail.com says...
> Missing smiley? :-)
Or is it an evil grin that's missing! :)
Bob Smith
> start with it.
Hmmm..........Naaah! Can't do it. I love rhetoric too much. So, bring
on your rhetoric and certainly don't leave out any pretentious,
pedantic, pompous, morality/history lessons. Anyway, if I write
"revolution" again, substitute the euphemistic, less inflamatory
"reconstruction" in its place. Okay, let's try it out. "Friends,
countrymen, fellow technicians, this is not a matter of evolution but,
REVOLUTION!" That's better huh?
Regarding the survey, why not make it optional? I think those who are
annoyed, just don't care, or are concerned would be more likely to
give misleading information during the survey. So how accurate is that
information? I already confessed to lieing. This thread started with
someone wonder how the survey answers might influence the test. That
thought has occured to me as well. Reform not conform!........Uh oh!
Boys and girls, I sense a history lesson coming soon, put on your
thinking caps. Bernie babe, that's your cue!
Bernie
>> Rhetoric begets rhetoric, so if you don't want it in return, don't
>> start with it.
>
>Hmmm..........Naaah! Can't do it. I love rhetoric too much. So, bring
>on your rhetoric and certainly don't leave out any pretentious,
>pedantic, pompous, morality/history lessons.
Those were freebies.
>Anyway, if I write
>"revolution" again, substitute the euphemistic, less inflamatory
>"reconstruction" in its place. Okay, let's try it out. "Friends,
>countrymen, fellow technicians, this is not a matter of evolution but,
>REVOLUTION!" That's better huh?
>
>Regarding the survey, why not make it optional? I think those who are
>annoyed, just don't care, or are concerned would be more likely to
>give misleading information during the survey. So how accurate is that
>information? I already confessed to lieing.
It is hard to say how accurate it is. Statistics is an interesting
field. You could very well have people lie on the questions and still
be able to derive legitimate data from the overall survey. In fact as
the number of questionnaires collected grows, all the weird stuff
evens out, and the data normalizes (as surprising as that may sound).
So as long as the survey isn't tilted in such a way that the people
lying skew the data in only one direction (as if most of the liars
answer that they are experts), then you can get very accurate data as
long as you have enough completed surveys.
>This thread started with
>someone wonder how the survey answers might influence the test. That
>thought has occured to me as well. Reform not conform!........
And you accused me of taking it off topic! At least I answered the
question by providing the reason behind the questions (which *was*
asked). You had to take it down the road of "lets revolt against the
whole certification industry." That is far off topic. But from your
way of thinking you were on topic and my response to your call for
revolution wasn't?
Hey, I'm not defending the problems--we all know I have been as
critical as anybody. The difference between you and I is that I
recognize that certification no longer has anything to do with
competency testing and everything to do with marketing a company and
its products. So to me it makes no sense to talk about
"revolutionizing the competency testing system" when it is not truly a
competency testing system anymore. The testing part is only a thin
veneer of the real aims of the program. So an attempt to
revolutionize such a system equates to telling companies how they can
and cannot market their products. If you don't have this perspective
(that is, certification being nothing more than slick marketing with a
veneer of competency testing) then you will always have a problem
explaining the reason that Cisco, MS, et al won't do anything to
correct such a "crappy system." My explanation is perfectly
consistent with the stance that these vendors take against the
complaints of people like yourself and myself.
--Bernie
marathoner
What was said earlier is interesting. (Not the flaming, the first
couple posts.)
Let's presume Cisco really uses that survey data in the way suggested:
First of all, Cisco's confidence in how people assess themselves
especially right before they are to take an exam should be close to
zero and they're smart enough to realize that. People will say
whatever they think is in their self-interest. This thread proves
that.
Let's take a random group of people and they all say "I am a god" and
then X percent pass and y percent fail . Cisco don't want so many
"gods" to fail so they make the test easier.
Let's take another random group of people and this time everyone says
"I am a newbie" and exactly the %age pass and exactly the same %age
fail. Cisco don't want so many newbies to pass so they make the test
harder.
Obviously if we want the test to get easier, we should all say we are
gods. But that only helps the next guy, not us. And... if we believe
the prevailing superstition (that they will go harder on a given
individual who says he/she is a god) -- then it's in one's immediate
best interest to answer that one is a total newbie, thus screwing those
who follow you. Is this why they raised the bar on the CIT from 755 to
776? And I heard that just a year ago it was only 700 or something
like that!!
The questions are downloaded before we take the tests (unless they
download four questions for each one they actually give you )(!!!) The
other thing they could do is use all the same questions but score
differently depending on those answers.
I'm suspicious, because what they would do if they really wanted to
believe those answers is ask them at the end. They could show you your
score right when you're done but not allow it to register or the test
center to print it until you answer those stupid questions. That would
remove all doubt about how those data are used and people would
probably be more honest.
Of course they can do whatever the **** they want -- it's their test
and if it's not fair tough.
---
View this thread: http://www.examnotes.net/article85462.html
marathoner - Certifiably Insane
------------------------------------------------------------------------
marathoner's Profile: http://www.examnotes.net/forums/member.php?action=getinfo&userid=91661
JA
I am not a 'god,' but I am Very_Very_Intimate with cisco's testing --
at least with the ccxA through ccxP curriculum.
For each 'course,' there are a pool of tests,
not a pool of questions.
The tests are not written by Cisco SMEs such as Sam Halabi,
nor do these CISCO SMEs proof read them.
The chore of writing the tests are outsourced to contractors
who are accepted in a bidding process. Very little QA is
performed by cisco on the tests that are created by these contractors.
Once the contractors submit the tests, a pool of tests are created.
Again, there is no central 'pool' of test questions,
just a pool of 'tests.'
When you sign up, the testing center will
download a test out of the pool.
The test does NOT become easier nor harder based upon your
answers to the survey questions.
Indicating that you have 'zero' experience or 'many' years of experience
will NOT change the difficulty level of the exam.
The only survey question which will affect your 'pass' or 'fail'
grade is the question: "are you a CCSI? "
(CCSI's must pass with a higher grade. The passing requirements for CCSIs
are listed at Cisco's site, and you must have access to a
Learning Partner account to see this)
However, the test is the same test that ccxA/P candidates take;
the 'difficulty' level is no higher....
At one time, CCSI candidates were indeed expected to take a more
difficult 'written' test (100 questions in 60 minutes as opposed to the
current
50 questions in 75 minutes) and pass with a higher score.
Now, the CCSI candidate takes the same test as anyone else, but must pass
with
a higher score. Therefore, it can be argued that current CCSI certification
requirements have been relaxed.
(( In addition to passing written tests with a higher score,
all CCSI candidates must pass a 1 day lab to show competence
before they can officially 'teach' ))
CCSI lab qualifications are performed by either Cisco themselves, or,
a training partner / third party organization that has been approved to
proctor and administer the lab challenges.
Is a CCSI that has been certified through a third party equaly qualified as
a CCSI
who has been certified through Cisco themselves?
Officially, no.
But due to potential conflict of interests, this can be debated......
OK, I had my say.
That's about it.....
Good Night.
-ja
"marathoner" <marathon...@mail.examnotes.net> wrote in message
news:marathon...@mail.examnotes.net...
bernie v
questions ive had on the ccnp exams were so poorly written that i stared at
the screen wondering what the hell they were asking ..
"JA" <jag...@wideopenwest.com> wrote in message
news:CJqdnUuagMD...@wideopenwest.com...
Bernie
<marathon...@mail.examnotes.net> wrote:
>
>What was said earlier is interesting. (Not the flaming, the first
>couple posts.)
>
>Let's presume Cisco really uses that survey data in the way suggested:
It is not presumption. It is a fact. I have developed a Prometric
certification exam before and that is exactly what those questions are
for.
>First of all, Cisco's confidence in how people assess themselves
>especially right before they are to take an exam should be close to
>zero and they're smart enough to realize that. People will say
>whatever they think is in their self-interest. This thread proves
>that.
Sure, but if you don't think that the questions have any bearing on
the actual exam, then you will probably attempt to answer as honestly
as any other survey. This is the first time I have ever encountered
someone stating that they thought that answering the survey questions
one way would alter the difficulty of the exam questions they got.
>Let's take a random group of people and they all say "I am a god" and
>then X percent pass and y percent fail . Cisco don't want so many
>"gods" to fail so they make the test easier.
>
>Let's take another random group of people and this time everyone says
>"I am a newbie" and exactly the %age pass and exactly the same %age
>fail. Cisco don't want so many newbies to pass so they make the test
>harder.
But the laws of statistics dictate that this all evens out in the
wash, assuming you collect enough surveys. What you want to avoid in
designing a survey is a survey that skews the results one way or the
other *consistently*. But if you know approximately how much it is
skewed, you can still compensate the results. Basically you can
derive legitimate data even if some are deliberately trying to screw
up your survey.
>Obviously if we want the test to get easier, we should all say we are
>gods. But that only helps the next guy, not us. And... if we believe
>the prevailing superstition (that they will go harder on a given
>individual who says he/she is a god) -- then it's in one's immediate
>best interest to answer that one is a total newbie, thus screwing those
>who follow you. Is this why they raised the bar on the CIT from 755 to
>776? And I heard that just a year ago it was only 700 or something
>like that!!
And yes, if *everyone* was aware of this, then they could very well
alter the future difficulty of the exams. But very few people
actually do know what the purpose is...few enough to not have a
meaningful impact one way or another. The only reason I know is
because I have been through the exam development process before.
>The questions are downloaded before we take the tests (unless they
>download four questions for each one they actually give you )(!!!) The
>other thing they could do is use all the same questions but score
>differently depending on those answers.
>
>I'm suspicious, because what they would do if they really wanted to
>believe those answers is ask them at the end. They could show you your
>score right when you're done but not allow it to register or the test
>center to print it until you answer those stupid questions. That would
>remove all doubt about how those data are used and people would
>probably be more honest.
I disagree. This is a classic dilemma. There are downsides to both.
The problem with doing it after is that people are less likely to want
to bother with the survey. If the score is shown after the survey,
then people are so anxious to see their score that they are likely to
rush through and check the first thing they see. If you show the
score first then do the survey, then knowing a pass or fail mark would
alter a person's perception. "I passed, so I must not really be a
newbie..." I do believe that you tend to get more honest answers when
the survey is at the beginning. No, it is not perfect because some
people will not choose to be honest, but then again, no matter when
you do any kind of survey you are going to get a set of people that
won't answer honestly.
>Of course they can do whatever the **** they want -- it's their test
>and if it's not fair tough.
--Bernie
Bernie
wrote:
>This is all speculation, and in fact, not at all true.
I think the comments he was referring to were mine. I (as did you)
clearly refuted (previously) the speculation about the survey altering
the difficulty of the exam that is taken *that* day. I then went on
to elaborate on the purpose of the survey. And that purpose is to
gauge the effectiveness and difficulty level of the exam as a whole.
It is certainly used *most* during the beta test period. But as a
whole, exam development is started by profiling a "passing" candidate,
and "on the bubble" candidate and a "failing" candidate (or something
to that effect). The exam is then written towards that difficulty
level. If in hindsight the question writers missed the mark,
appropriate actions can be taken to adjust the exam difficulty level
(as a whole). But there is no way to know if this is the case or not
without some sort of survey to collect data about the pass/fail rates
of the various categories of expertise.
--Bernie
JA
> On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 17:35:53 -0800, "JA" <jag...@wideopenwest.com>
> wrote:
>
> >This is all speculation, and in fact, not at all true.
>
> I think the comments he was referring to were mine. I (as did you)
> clearly refuted (previously) the speculation about the survey altering
> the difficulty of the exam that is taken *that* day. I then went on
> to elaborate on the purpose of the survey.
I was refering to who ever raised the possibilty that
the test's 'difficulty' changed based upon the answers to the survey
questions. I didn't read the whole thread, but instead just jumped
in. (perhaps ungracefully) Sorry if I ruffled any feathers.....
-ja
Bernie
wrote:
Not at all (meaning ruffled feathers)! I just wanted to clarify what
I thought he was talking about since I had previously posted about the
*real* purpose of the survey.
I'm glad you posted because it helps demystify the whole Cisco exam
thing with the variable question pool and all that other urban
mythology. It deserves being stated several times by several people
so that more people are aware of the real facts. [Personally, I find
it most irritating when the "huge variable question pool" is used as
justification for braindumping: "Who could possibly memorize the whole
pool..."]
--Bernie
Hansang Bae
bernie@nospam_nycap.rr.com says...
> cisco should start performing QA on their tests because some of the
> questions ive had on the ccnp exams were so poorly written that i stared at
> the screen wondering what the hell they were asking ..
Not just poorly written. I've had one question on the re-cert that did
not have a correct answer. I took the time to write in a survey saying
"this question has no right answer because..."
I am 1000% positive that someone goofed. It wasn't a case of my
misreading something or overlooking something. The correct answer
simply was not there.
JA
"Hansang Bae" <uo...@alp.ee.pbz> wrote in message
news:MPG.18a2669b6...@news-server.nyc.rr.com...
> I am 1000% positive that someone goofed. It wasn't a case of my
> misreading something or overlooking something. The correct answer
> simply was not there.
>
Correct-o-mundo!
Cisco is, at this time, going through a re-write of many of the exams,
and for many of the exams, things will improve. I think they are tired
of all the write-in comments......
-ja
Mortimer Mouse
Not before time, either. I've been in hsb's shoes on various tests.
Sometimes the questions are completely meaningless so that (any way
you read them) there just can't be a correct answer, and sometimes the
right answer just isn't there.
I always take great pleasure in writing comments on the tests, so it's
nice to know someone is taking notice at last.
Pat Colbeck
was on the first IP Telephony Trouble Shooting course that was run in
the UK and the instructure came over from the USA to teach it. He didn't
work for Cisco but for a third party that developed the course for Cisco
and wrote the exam.
He was very interested in teh scores and comments from all those who
took the exam at the end of the course. In fact non of us who took the
exam got any points at all in one section. He thought the exam was wrong
as he asked us individually several questions about that topic and we
all got them correct. He then passed his coments back to the guys who
wrote the test.
Didnt help us individually though as no regrading was done even though
myself and at least one other guy failed by only one question.
I have since re taken this exam and its much better now, the topics
covered are the same but the questions are phrased better and I didnt
see any with no possible answers (I passed this time). Its still a
rotten exam (very little theory all application stuff like how generate
reports that do this with Call Manager, no good for a packet plumber
like me)
Pat
--
________________________________________________________________________
Pat Colbeck
Cisco CCIE :2305
E-Mail :pcol...@bashq.org
________________________________________________________________________