Just a little venting
DalePres
I'm going to take 70-320 this week... my third and, hopefully, final exam
for MCAD, though MCSD and renewing my MCSE and MCDBA still loom over my
head.
And with each exam, I have the same complaint. Microsoft sets the standards
and establishes the skill sets required to achieve certification. Having
done so, why do they not prepare training material that teaches those
skills. Teach what they test and test what they teach. If they did that,
they'd actually have much better control over the skill sets and technical
ability of their Microsoft Certified Professionals.
Novell does it.. Their white books teach everything they expect you to know
for the exams...
The whole "real world" component Microsoft tries to impart is not anyone's
real world since the exams are prepared long before anyone has enough real
world experience with the final release product to establish a definition
for real world. Or their real world experience is based on internal
experiences with in Microsoft... Like that's real world for the rest of
us...
And while the NDA is basically a good thing, it has ruined the whole idea of
newsgroups. Why bother to have these newsgroups? Because of the NDA no one
will even talk about the content of the exam in general terms for fear of
the MS hammer falling on them. There's no peer discussions of the exams or
certification processes going on here; there's only people repeatedly asking
the same questions that are clearly answered on the train_cert site at
Microsoft.com.
If you outlaw discussion about the exams, only outlaws will discuss the
exams.
Ok.... back to Kalani - second time through because I am trying to learn
everything under the sun since I don't know what else to do. Geeze, I am
tired of overstudying while the "outlaws" have all the answers before they
walk into the room!
Whew! I'm glad I got that off my chest.
Dale
UAError
>or.. would you like a little cheese with that whine?
>
>I'm going to take 70-320 this week... my third and, hopefully, final exam
>for MCAD, though MCSD and renewing my MCSE and MCDBA still loom over my
>head.
>
>And with each exam, I have the same complaint. Microsoft sets the standards
>and establishes the skill sets required to achieve certification. Having
>done so, why do they not prepare training material that teaches those
>skills. Teach what they test and test what they teach. If they did that,
>they'd actually have much better control over the skill sets and technical
>ability of their Microsoft Certified Professionals.
>
>Novell does it.. Their white books teach everything they expect you to know
>for the exams...
>
In principle I agree but if we're looking for improvements
might as well go further - rather that tailoring towards the
exams which "samples" an extremely limited sub-set of
knowledge (of the technology), supply training material that
covers the "skills being measured" in detail - yes, it would
take longer to prepare but at least you would acquire a
knowledge base that is (more) well rounded and useful.
Maybe there is an ulterior motive of trying to promote the
courses that generate more revenue than books (which
probably generate very little if any).
>
>The whole "real world" component Microsoft tries to impart is not anyone's
>real world since the exams are prepared long before anyone has enough real
>world experience with the final release product to establish a definition
>for real world. Or their real world experience is based on internal
>experiences with in Microsoft... Like that's real world for the rest of
>us...
>
I might be missing your point here but ever considered that
everybody's "real world" is ultimately different? Any "real
world" conjured up by any testing organization will seem
artificial to a significant portion of the audience unless
you are really tightly focused on a particular application
area and the associated audience. As far as I can see there
really is no "real world" component in the certification.
What would you like to see? Something like the Java
Developer Certification?
http://suned.sun.com/US/certification/java/java_devj2se.html
Here you get a programming assignment which you need to
complete on your own time (though less than 12 months is
recommended) and if accepted you have a follow up exam where
you have to justify your design decisions (to ensure that
you are actually the author of the solution).
The programming assignment will probably not relate to
anything you deal with in your business life - so it will
still seem "artificial". And while this type of testing does
raise the quality of the certification it also becomes more
expensive as now at least one warm body who wants his/her
paycheck is evaluating your work and laying the foundation
for the essay exam and evaluating that too. Furthermore you
are now exposed to the risk of catching an evaluator on a
bad day were nothing but supreme excellence will do.
Yes, it raises the quality of certification but are you
willing to pay the price (higher exam fees, increased risk
of failure you have little control over, and even more time
to complete certification; we should be willing but what
business problem is certification solving? At some point the
investment into certification isn't worth it, especially as
technology doesn't stand still. Unfortunately there are very
few effective certification opportunities for "the craft" of
creating software solutions.)
I'm not saying that the Microsoft Status Quo is ideal - far
from it - but careful what you wish for - there is no
perfect solution.
Maybe somebody thought that they could cut down on the
number of exam questions if many questions only addressed
20% of the esoteric niches of the technology - only
experienced individuals would ever run into these problems
right? This tactic does not address the problem of
braindumps. They really should significantly increase the
number of questions in their testbank to a point where it
becomes impossible to memorize them all (i.e. you actually
have to understand the technology); the majority of these
questions should address problems that relate to the more
mundane areas; maybe they should also increase the number of
questions on every test.
>
>And while the NDA is basically a good thing, it has ruined the whole idea of
>newsgroups. Why bother to have these newsgroups? Because of the NDA no one
>will even talk about the content of the exam in general terms for fear of
>the MS hammer falling on them. There's no peer discussions of the exams or
>certification processes going on here; there's only people repeatedly asking
>the same questions that are clearly answered on the train_cert site at
>Microsoft.com.
>
It the old signal to noise ratio thing - unfortunately the
signal is buried somewhere. Anyway the NDA basically
disallows the discussions of the questions as such. However
that doesn't stop anybody from recommending preparation
materials after they have taken the tests (just look at the
codeclinic links). Over the last few months there were a few
posts that suggested that Kalani's 70-315/70-316 coverage of
security was weak.
There was at least one post that pointed out the lack of
soap-header coverage in Kalani's 70-320 guide.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=soap+headers+kalani&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=3fc3d37a.352358584%40msnews.microsoft.com&rnum=1
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=soap+headers+kalani&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=O2KRltcLEHA.2976%40TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl&rnum=2
>
>If you outlaw discussion about the exams, only outlaws will discuss the
>exams.
>
You can still discuss the "Skills being measured" - which
are out in the open. However very few individuals are going
to be motivated to try to memorize 55-57 questions and then
cross-reference study materials and publish them. Apart from
the problems this creates. You are supposed to be competent
in the domain outlined by the "Skills being measured" - not
in the taking of the exam - any exam can only ever cover a
minute subset of the "Skills being measured".
The codeclinic links are a great resource when it comes to
the "Skills being measured" - unless you are merely
interested in passing the exam, rather than being proficient
in the "Skills being measured".
Kalani's guides supply you with a wealth of links to deepen
you knowledge in the relevant areas which you are free to
pursue. This is even more important when it comes to
Cornish's 70-300 exam cram. While the guide is only about
500 pages, exploration of the links at the end of the
chapters is essential (and sometimes time-consuming) as the
chapters themselves merely gloss over the material.
You are always free to ask for clarification on specific
items of the "Skills Being measured" and somebody
knowledgable may supply you with some relevant material.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&th=1ab76f2c23beff79&rnum=1
>
>Ok.... back to Kalani - second time through because I am trying to learn
>everything under the sun since I don't know what else to do.
Check the links at the end of the chapters (see if there is
some updated content). Scan the group's past 12-18 months on
google to discover shortcomings of the Kalani guides (some
reviews on amazon.com can be helpful to).
>Geeze, I am
>tired of overstudying while the "outlaws" have all the answers before they
>walk into the room!
While I can feel your pain - you can't dwell on it. There
are people that got all the way through medical school and
residency and who are still lousy physicians.
Yes, the certification is worthless (especially in the face
of braindumps) - on its own.
However make the most of it - show off your work experience
(on a resume) in the best possible way - i.e. how you where
instrumental in the solution of business problems through
cogent application of information technology. Then use the
certification to advertise:
Oh, by the way I am currently certified in .NET technology.
Once you get to the interview you should be able to run
circle's around those "outlaws" who were able to memorize
exam questions but have no idea what the technology's
strengths and limitations are.
Ultimately you are doing the certification for yourself - as
a milestone to confirm to yourself that you have now reached
the point that you have a basic understanding of the .NET
technology that allows you to use it (somewhat) effectively
as a tool in solution of business problems.
>
>Whew! I'm glad I got that off my chest.
>
>Dale
... feel better now?
DalePres
after the test - *laugh*
Dale
"UAError" <nu...@null.null> wrote in message
news:ub0he0heilqvqk0ug...@4ax.com...
UAError
>Good points, all of them, but I'll let you know Saturday if I feel better -
>after the test - *laugh*
>
>Dale
>
After Kalani (including working through the examples - and
looking the "what exactly is that good for" bits up in the
MSDN, you should be fine, especially if you supplement the
areas mentioned by others).
However, don't get rattled!
IMO 70-320 is the exam with the highests "psychological
warfare" component of the three .NET technology exams. It is
already a pretty mixed bag of technologies that didn't fit
under the more general Windows or Web applications heading.
It spans several technologies that each could be used as a
basis for an entire exam. That combined with usual helping
of esoteric questions to gauge your experience level can
quickly unsettle you. You'll probably find that you'll have
to rely much more on a thorough conceptual unterstanding on
how microsoft tends to structure their technology to solve
problems to narrow down the right answer - rather than the
spontaneous "I know that one" response.
That means you are going to have to watch your time
carefully. Right at the beginning (once you know how many
questions you are facing) figure out the average time per
question (usually 1.5 minutes) you can spend and figure out
some milestones - so many questions answered after 15, 30,
45 minutes and so on. Try not to spend the entire
time/question on each question - if you're getting close
force yourself to make a selection, mark it for review and
move on and don't dwell on it - you're probably doing better
than you realize. If you miss one of your milestones pick up
the pace, still spend the time on understanding the question
but force yourself to make a selection sooner, don't allow
second guessing to get in the way (you can always mark it
for review).
Good Luck.
DalePres
one even though I've never failed. Though 70-029 I only passed by one
question.
Anyway... *looking at the clock*.. back at it.
Dale
"UAError" <nu...@null.null> wrote in message
news:b0pie0tc1llgn6efc...@4ax.com...
The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere
>Developer Certification?
that approach is a million times better than the approach taken by
microsoft. I've done the Java (Sun) developer exam and I found it
easy; it was easy because of my real world experience which easily
enabled me to performed the required tasks. However, without that
experience, the exams (even the programmer exam) would have been far
harder, certainly dumpers would have their work cut out passing those
exams. Maybe this is why the certs provided by Sun, IBM, Oracle,
Cisco, Ericson, blah,blah,blah are more appreciated than ms certs
(unless that is, the holder works for an ms partner body shop).
For ms, any fcukwits can (and do) pass their exams, which is why ms
certs are worthless and 'certify' nothing. The only winners are
scammers who sucker sad fools into buying the 'products' (ha,ha). If
an IT 'professional' cannot pass these exams, then I wonder how they
would get on writing a twenty thousand word dissertation on a chosen
software development process? In any case they have know place in IT.
You only have to look and the utterly stupid questions posted to this,
and other cert groups, by people wanting to become an mcp. Dear lord
enough is enough.....
Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere
>courses that generate more revenue than books (which
>probably generate very little if any).
I also believe in this type of conspiracy theory. After all why are
the ms training books so crap, when in general, their other books are
excellent?
The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere
>willing to pay the price (higher exam fees, increased risk
>of failure you have little control over, and even more time
>to complete certification
Quality before quantity; ms should not be churning out mcp's in the
same manner as the red army did in WWII.
If I was many years younger, I certainly would want a certification
which actual meant something, and would quite happy let my employer
pay for me to achieve it!
The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere
>number of questions in their testbank to a point where it
>becomes impossible to memorize them all (i.e. you actually
>have to understand the technology);
No, the exams should be written. Whereby the test taker not only has
to answer the questions and also has to explain and describe how they
arrived at the answer. Those simple point 'n' click exams, as you say,
simply require one to memorized the types of answers expected, thus
the question can be answered and a full mark given without the
question actually being understood.
The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere
What else, other than for amusement!
Eric
> What would you like to see? Something like the Java
> Developer Certification?
> http://suned.sun.com/US/certification/java/java_devj2se.html
> Here you get a programming assignment which you need to
> complete on your own time (though less than 12 months is
> recommended)
I like the way Oracle certifies people at the master level. You have to
go to Chicago in-person for a couple days, where they have a lot of
hands-on tasks for you to complete. There's very little info available
ahead of time (but there is a big outline like the one MS provides).
It's a "put up or shut up" kind of test. It is a bit expensive, but
that certification carries a lot of weight in the industry! You can't
cheat. For developers, they would require us to make complete apps -
including the DB tables and SPs.
Eric
The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere
>go to Chicago in-person for a couple days, where they have a lot of
>hands-on tasks for you to complete. There's very little info available
>ahead of time (but there is a big outline like the one MS provides).
>It's a "put up or shut up" kind of test. It is a bit expensive, but
>that certification carries a lot of weight in the industry! You can't
>cheat. For developers, they would require us to make complete apps -
>including the DB tables and SPs.
Exactly.
UAError
And for some reason Oracle decided to not have a "Masters"
grade for their developer certifications.
http://www.oracle.com/education/certification/index.html?certpaths.html
Anyway I must have phrased that badly - it was not my intent
to criticize the process of the Java Developer
certification.
Even Sun decided to take this route only for the
Sun certified Java Developer (SCJD)
http://suned.sun.com/US/certification/java/java_devj2se.html
and
Sun certified Enterprise Architect (SCEA)
http://suned.sun.com/US/certification/java/java_archj2ee.html
certification.
As far as I know
Sun certified Java Programmer (SCJP)
http://suned.sun.com/US/certification/java/java_progj2se.html
Sun certified Web Component Developer (SCWCD)
http://suned.sun.com/US/certification/java/java_web.html
Sun certified Business Component Developer (SCBCD)
http://suned.sun.com/US/certification/java/java_busj23e.html
are still "just" multiple choice tests.
My actual intent was to use it as an example to illustrate
that an "improved" certification process will require the
more direct involvement of other professionals, with the
following consequences:
- the process will be more expensive (these people want to
get paid)
- the process will be slower - the more complex the domain
tested, the fewer (reasonable) opportunities for testing
automation arise.
- the potential for the injection of a more subjective
evaluation.
The Oracle Master grade certification makes the point even
more clearly as you have to go really out of your way for
the final assessment (and carry the incidental costs).
Yes, higher education also can take cash, sacrifice and
effort but the certifications we are talking about here are
merely (perishable) PRODUCT certifications.
I would hope that an Oracle "Masters" grade DBA would still
be capable of generating a passible (but probably
sub-optimal) solution if forced to work with another product
(DB2, SQL Server, etc.) but that is not the object of
Oracle's certification.
An Employer/Client who knows you, isn't going to need your
certification - they usually know how "good" you are. They
have no interest in getting you certified (and paying for it
with training, exam fees, and professional development time)
unless their industry position requires it (e.g. a
partnership of some sort). To a business any certification
is "cheap" enough - unless when it gets to the "professional
development" time, which can be considerable when
professional activities and certification requirements don't
exactly line up.
So a significant portion of the certification audience is
paying for this certification out of their own (most likely
after tax) pocket and with "after work" time (provided they
have access to the necessary equipment and products) - some
in hope to stand out in the next pile of resumes, some
simply for their own validation (or bragging rights) that
they have achieved a certain level of proficiency in a
product they are working with.
"Improve" the certification process too much (make it more
expensive) and you will lose that audience - not necessarily
because of lack of competence but because of the prohibitive
opportunity cost (apart from the risk "having a bad" and
therefore costly evaluation day). Instead of getting
certified you could be:
- getting some real work done
- invest in some product-neutral
professional development (gasp)
- etc.
Also IT environments tend to be heterogeneous in nature and
you can only afford to be certified in so many products -
and the last thing any employer/client wants is a certified
professional how cannot see beyond the products of the
certification sponsor.
The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere
>grade for their developer certifications.
>http://www.oracle.com/education/certification/index.html?certpaths.html
All will change shortly....
>Anyway I must have phrased that badly - it was not my intent
>to criticize the process of the Java Developer
>certification.
My intend has always been to criticize the microsoft certification
process. Their process is a joke, plain and simple.
>Even Sun decided to take this route only for the
>Sun certified Java Developer (SCJD)
>http://suned.sun.com/US/certification/java/java_devj2se.html
>and
>Sun certified Enterprise Architect (SCEA)
>http://suned.sun.com/US/certification/java/java_archj2ee.html
>certification.
>As far as I know
>Sun certified Java Programmer (SCJP)
>http://suned.sun.com/US/certification/java/java_progj2se.html
it's just the entry exam which you need before you can do the 'real'
McCoy. Which leads too another grip, why no ms exam which covers the
basics of the programming language?
>Sun certified Web Component Developer (SCWCD)
>http://suned.sun.com/US/certification/java/java_web.html
>Sun certified Business Component Developer (SCBCD)
>http://suned.sun.com/US/certification/java/java_busj23e.html
>are still "just" multiple choice tests.
Seamed daft to me too!
The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere
>that an "improved" certification process will require the
>more direct involvement of other professionals, with the
>following consequences:
>- the process will be more expensive (these people want to
>get paid)
Quality before quantity.
>- the process will be slower - the more complex the domain
>tested, the fewer (reasonable) opportunities for testing
>automation arise.
So what if 'humans' have to mark the exam(s)...
>- the potential for the injection of a more subjective
>evaluation.
Good, all for it.
>The Oracle Master grade certification makes the point even
>more clearly as you have to go really out of your way for
>the final assessment (and carry the incidental costs).
I love going on Jollies! For me it's business as usual. If
people/companies see the benefit and 'worth' in the undertaking,
that's all that matters.
>Yes, higher education also can take cash, sacrifice and
>effort but the certifications we are talking about here are
>merely (perishable) PRODUCT certifications.
Excellent point, they are only product certifications, and is another
failing of the whole process (not just for ms). I personally would
like to see more 'professional' qualifications, which are vender
neutral (i.e. BCS in the UK) which are not an extension of any
corporate marketing machine.
>I would hope that an Oracle "Masters" grade DBA would still
>be capable of generating a passible (but probably
>sub-optimal) solution if forced to work with another product
>(DB2, SQL Server, etc.)
You know as well as I do, conceptual and logical data modeling should
(and is) conducted without too much thought of how the data and
services are to be implemented.
>but that is not the object of
>Oracle's certification.
The implementation of all rdbm's are un [ansi] standard, worst of all
is sql server....
The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere
>certification - they usually know how "good" you are. They
>have no interest in getting you certified (and paying for it
>with training, exam fees, and professional development time)
>unless their industry position requires it (e.g. a
>partnership of some sort). To a business any certification
>is "cheap" enough - unless when it gets to the "professional
>development" time, which can be considerable when
>professional activities and certification requirements don't
>exactly line up.
My view that any company that develops software, whether in house,
bespoke or shrink wrapped, should be 'certified' by an accredited body
to do so. Naturally, so should the people in that company.
The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere
>paying for this certification out of their own (most likely
>after tax) pocket and with "after work" time (provided they
>have access to the necessary equipment and products) - some
>in hope to stand out in the next pile of resumes, some
>simply for their own validation (or bragging rights) that
>they have achieved a certain level of proficiency in a
>product they are working with.
which are the wrong [selfish] reasons for doing so. A certification
'should' be an indicate to a client/customer/employee that the
certification holder is indeed 'certified' to perform the tasks he/she
is 'certified' for. This is simply NOT the case with ms certs; again
the whole IT industry is still living on cloud nine.
The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere
>expensive) and you will lose that audience - not necessarily
>because of lack of competence but because of the prohibitive
>opportunity cost (apart from the risk "having a bad" and
>therefore costly evaluation day). Instead of getting
>certified you could be:
I'm all for getting rid of incompetence, laziness and ignorance.
>- getting some real work done
>- invest in some product-neutral
> professional development (gasp)
>- etc.
chicken and egg - we can't produce good quality software which is fit
for purpose, because we don't have the time/money/ability to train
ourselves how to produce good quality software which is fit for
purpose....
The sad fact is far too many companies have no idea how to produce
good quality software which is fit for purpose - and it's NOT getting
any better...
The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere
>you can only afford to be certified in so many products -
>and the last thing any employer/client wants is a certified
>professional how cannot see beyond the products of the
>certification sponsor.
another sad fact of IT life - one up to aggressive marketing, I guess!
Good luck and all the best.
Dale
Let me tell you, Kalani's book is not nearly as on the mark for this test as
it was for 70-315. I felt like I was taking the wrong exam! Acutally, the
topics were the same but there were questions about things I had never heard
of, and I read Kalani cover to cover twice and did every exercise and
step-by-step at least once. Along with that, most areas I read in Kalani
lead to long meanderings through MSDN and other sites on the topics and
still MS made that exam look pretty foreign.
As it was, I was able to answer about half of the questions absolutely
without doubt.. I knew the answer for sure. The rest of them, I had to
eliminate the obviously wrong answers and take my best guess from the rest.
Oddly, on some of the questions, my elimination process absolutely
eliminated all the answers... I would have to say that this was the most
poorly written exam I have taken from Microsoft. There were some questions
that none of the answers matched the scenario or that the scenario in no way
provided enough information to conclude any of the answers but then what can
you do except try to choose the least wrong answer.
Well, over all, I guess I was able to choose the least wrong often enough!
I'm just glad that one is over.
Dale
MCAD, MCSE, MCDBA
"DalePres" <don-t-spa-m-me@lea-ve-me-a-lone--.com> wrote in message
news:uqrSYckY...@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
Pollux
daleDel...@msndotcomNot.Net says...
> Ok... I feel better. I took and passed 70-320 today and completed MCAD!!!
Congrats on passing your exam. Would you agree with the general
consensus that this exam was more difficult than 70-315 and 70-316?
Dale
They seem to have focused on the most obscure features of xml and server
side development that they could find. I think many of the questions were
chosen just to balance the scoring curve, rather than because of their value
in assessing skills in the areas tested.
Dale
"Pollux" <pol...@nospam.spam> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b611c99f...@beta.usenet.plus.net...
UAError
>"Pollux" <pol...@nospam.spam> wrote in message
>news:MPG.1b611c99f...@beta.usenet.plus.net...
>> In article <uSOeqJra...@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl>,
>> daleDel...@msndotcomNot.Net says...
>> > Ok... I feel better. I took and passed 70-320 today and completed
>MCAD!!!
>>
>> Congrats on passing your exam. Would you agree with the general
>> consensus that this exam was more difficult than 70-315 and 70-316?
>
>Absolutely.
>
>They seem to have focused on the most obscure features of xml and server
>side development that they could find. I think many of the questions were
>chosen just to balance the scoring curve, rather than because of their value
>in assessing skills in the areas tested.
>
>Dale
>
Well, I guess you have now experienced what I described as
the "psychological warfare component". Just when I was
clicking that final submit button I was thinking: "If I have
to take this exam again, I haven't got a clue how I'm going
to prepare". Oddly enough my score was higher than it was
for my 70-316 or 70-315.
Eric
> Let me tell you, Kalani's book is not nearly as on the mark for this
> test as it was for 70-315.
Are you referring to the Training Guide, or Exam Cram?
Kalani's Training Guide book is still the best of the available choices.
The problem is that the world of Web Services is advancing quickly, and
it's hard for a book to stay current.
Eric
Eric
> They seem to have focused on the most obscure features of xml and
> server side development that they could find.
One thing lots of people fail to do is to study the syntax of the .xsd
and .asmx files.
Similarly, you should study the syntax of .aspx and .asmx files before
taking the 70-305/70-315.
Eric
Dale
draw and I got more of the questions he didn't cover. No one could expect
any single book to cover it all, since there are tens of thousands of pages
on MSDN that Microsoft can draw on for the test questions.
Dale
<Eric> wrote in message news:OODfuW0...@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
Mark the shark
I recently had a job interview where the interviewer said,
"Pretend I don't anything about .Net and explain to
me what it is?"
This was a chance for me to tell him all I knew about
.Net and I don't think outlaws would do well in this
case?
Mark, 1 test from MCSD success?
>-----Original Message-----
>or.. would you like a little cheese with that whine?
>
>I'm going to take 70-320 this week... my third and,
hopefully, final exam
>for MCAD, though MCSD and renewing my MCSE and MCDBA
still loom over my
>head.
>
>And with each exam, I have the same complaint. Microsoft
sets the standards
>and establishes the skill sets required to achieve
certification. Having
>done so, why do they not prepare training material that
teaches those
>skills. Teach what they test and test what they teach.
If they did that,
>they'd actually have much better control over the skill
sets and technical
>ability of their Microsoft Certified Professionals.
>
>Novell does it.. Their white books teach everything they
expect you to know
>for the exams...
>
>The whole "real world" component Microsoft tries to
impart is not anyone's
>real world since the exams are prepared long before
anyone has enough real
>world experience with the final release product to
establish a definition
>for real world. Or their real world experience is based
on internal
>experiences with in Microsoft... Like that's real world
for the rest of
>us...
>
>And while the NDA is basically a good thing, it has
ruined the whole idea of
>newsgroups. Why bother to have these newsgroups?
Because of the NDA no one
>will even talk about the content of the exam in general
terms for fear of
>the MS hammer falling on them. There's no peer
discussions of the exams or
>certification processes going on here; there's only
people repeatedly asking
>the same questions that are clearly answered on the
train_cert site at
>Microsoft.com.
>
>If you outlaw discussion about the exams, only outlaws
will discuss the
>exams.
>
>Ok.... back to Kalani - second time through because I am
trying to learn
>everything under the sun since I don't know what else to
do. Geeze, I am
>tired of overstudying while the "outlaws" have all the
answers before they
>walk into the room!
>
WKidd
more intelligent to ask.
"Mark the shark" <anon...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0ff801c4a027$b13621a0$a601...@phx.gbl...
Cindy Winegarden
Some employers include something like "excellent oral and written
communication" as part of the job requirements. Explaining .NET would go a
long way to demonstrate those skills.
--
Cindy Winegarden MCSD, Microsoft Visual FoxPro MVP
cindy.wi...@mvps.org www.cindywinegarden.com
"Mark the shark" <anon...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0ff801c4a027$b13621a0$a601...@phx.gbl...
VB Student
j/k
Seriously though, what did you say?
"Mark the shark" <anon...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0ff801c4a027$b13621a0$a601...@phx.gbl...