From: Ken Snyder (phizzog@xxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Aug 03 2001 - 21:12:06 GMT-3
Yes, it was Stephen. He was a nice person but it just seemed like he had
a bad week. The other problem is that he was solo. There were no other
proctors in Halifax. The last two days I was there no one else made it
to Day 2. I even saw one guy leave crying (it was kind of humorous but
understandable). I think, I bit myself in the butt because after that
guy left on my Day 2 (I mean Day 4). I made the comment to him being so
tuff on those guys. I guess he got his revenge. Thanks for all the input
from everyone and good luck!
-Ken
-----Original Message-----
From: Russell Lusignan [mailto:rlusignan@corp.attcanada.ca]
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 10:57 AM
To: 'Ken Snyder'
Subject: RE: CCIE Experience from the depths of below...
Hey Ken, was Steve Barnes your proctor?
Russell Lusignan
AT&T Canada
Internet Data Center Services
(905) 896-6267
Fax: (905) 896-4865
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Snyder [mailto:phizzog@home.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 4:03 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: CCIE Experience from the depths of below...
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> I feel entitled to let everyone know what happened in my
> 4 days of
> misery last week in Halifax. I started Day 1 last Tuesday. It
> was a fair
> test with many great tricks but I was very confident moving into Day2.
> Well I received my Day 2 lab and to my delight, I had covered many of
> the topics in great detail. So I started flying through Day 2. Well
> about an hour into my test, the proctor came up and took the
> lab from my
> desk, he gave me another lab and told me to start over. I guess the
> other fellow who made it to day 2 received the lab that was
> designed for
> my rack and I had his lab. The proctor mistakenly gave us the wrong
> exams. The other guy couldn't understand why his ATM wouldn't come up
> but my lab fit on my topology so I didn't notice it. So I get the new
> lab and begin to start over. Now many of the things I had from the
> previous lab over lapped and I spent an hour fixing things. Than I got
> to a section that required a configuration that I did have an
> option for
> on my router so after researching it in the documentation, I
> found that
> I had in fact the wrong IOS on my router. I had to hunt down the
> proctor. He knew right away that it was the wrong IOS so he gave me a
> Flash card and told me to fix it! I was fit to be tied at
> that point. So
> all in all I pled my case and the proctor met talked with this
> supervisor Lornne Braddock (who is very pleasant to deal with in these
> situations). They gave me three options: take the test again
> at a later
> date, take the test again the next day, or take the 1 day
> exam the next
> day. The problem I faced is that they would only waive the
> test fee. The
> next trip would be out of my own pocket so I had to take a chance and
> start over the next day. I was beyond exhausted and tired on
> the morning
> of Day 3. I started Day 1 (I mean 3) and it was a completely new lab
> with similar topics but new tricks (it was fair). I finished early as
> usual and checked all my config's. I was very confident again moving
> into Day 2 but very tired. I started Day 2. It was tough!! Many new
> topics and tricks that I've never seen. I used my usual strategy: kick
> out big point topics I'm familiar with, than gimmie points and then
> research problems. Well I found a problem with one router that I just
> couldn't figure out. I tried all different kinds of solutions. It was
> close to my problem from my other day 2 that had the wrong IOS so I
> started to think that I had the wrong code again. Well once I was
> convinced it was a code issue, the proctor came in to send me
> to lunch.
> I questioned him about it and he told me it was a common problem. I
> immediate assumed he was referring that it was a common
> problem with the
> wrong IOS like my previous day 2. So later when I missed by a few
> points, I pled my case that I felt there was a problem with
> the code on
> the router and it cost me an hour in the lab which prevented me from
> double checking my work. He told me at that point it wasn't a problem
> with the code. I was very upset so I went to leave but then I
> felt that
> this was my only chance to know for sure if it was a problem
> or not with
> the code so I requested the proctor to show me that it was not a code
> issue. He refused! I was the only person in the testing
> center that day.
> I was so angry at that point because now I could never know
> for sure if
> it was a problem or not. So I pled my case with the management staff.
> Every single person danced right around the issue until I spoke with
> Lorrne again today. Well he addressed the issue but I couldn't believe
> what his stance was on the policy of there lab. He straight out said
> that as a test taker I am not entitled to question the
> proctors decision
> even if I felt there was a problem with the equipment. My
> stance is that
> I was not a typical client at that point because of the
> previous events
> that lead up this. The proctor had already proved to me that he does
> make BIG mistakes and did load the wrong IOS on my router two days
> before so I felt that with this considered how could I trust his word
> that there was nothing wrong. All he had to do is show me
> that the code
> did work. I didn't expect him to show me how to configure it
> but rather
> just check and make sure. An automated computer proctor could
> have just
> told me no your are wrong go home. I was under the assumption
> that this
> was one of the roles of the proctor is that they are available incase
> there may be a technical problem with your equipment. They
> kept feeding
> me the line of crap that this is the same equipment used for
> months but
> every time I told them that I know for a fact based on experience that
> week they do change the IOS on the routers and that would effect my
> configuration and abilities to solve the issue. Cisco
> basically told me,
> too bad so sad. I guess I should have known better than to trust that
> proctor a second run through. Everyone has always told me to question
> the proctor if I felt I was right but LISTEN to me you have
> NO RIGHTS as
> a test taker in the CCIE program. You either kill your lab so
> they can't
> screw you or pass on the merits of the proctor. It doesn't matter if
> there is a problem with your equipment, they got your money and they
> don't have to prove ANYTHING! I can't believe this notion when you
> consider this is a lab exam with many variables that could go wrong so
> when they tell me oh its worked 100's of times before and I just
> witnessed two days earlier that problems do happen, how can I accept
> that response? Now where does it state that I'm not allowed
> to question
> a hardware problem. Look I understand that you can't start questioning
> the proctors grading for everything, I know they have a review process
> and the labs and answers are pretty well covered but if I
> feel there is
> a problem with the equipment shouldn't I be given the opportunity to
> have the proctor double check the equipment? Now it's hard
> for me to say
> that the program doesn't care about its test takers because they did
> resolve my first issue. I just can't get over that as a test
> taker in a
> lab with variables the proctor is about as useful as
> computer. This also
> brings to mind many new issues with the One Day lab. I can't imagine
> taking the lab and leaving and than paying to have them check your
> config's if you felt you were correct. How could you ever prove that
> there was a problem with the rack you were on and not the config's? I
> just see dark days for this program with these attitudes and
> stances. I
> thought that part of the experience was to go over the lab with the
> proctor so he can let you know your weak points and gives you the
> opportunity to know if they took points away on something
> your know was
> out of your control or you know that it was configured
> correctly but it
> just might not have been in the same syntax they were looking for. So
> now I'm faced with the dilemma of deciding whether to give it another
> shot. I know I'm a marked man now so who knows what lab they
> will throw
> at me. I'm ready for almost anything but based on the crap I've seen
> from them last week who knows!! One thing is for sure, I will NEVER
> recommend or support the notion of anyone of my peers taking
> the lab in
> Halifax. I don't think anyone made it to troubleshooting all
> week. It's
> tough up there so watch out you! At least San Jose there are several
> proctors and they can come up with a collective resolution before they
> ship you out the door with such a crazy experience. I know some may
> disagree with me or agree but I feel better just letting everyone know
> this "un-written" rule regarding not being able to question
> the proctor.
> From what I've heard from others, this seems to be dependent on the
> proctor you have when you take your exam because I've heard
> others that
> passed solely because they argued with proctor and received
> points that
> were incorrectly taken away, when they were told they didn't
> make it to
> day two. Now I have to decide whether to move on or pursue this crazy
> program. I'll tell you one thing, I won't be taking the One Day Exam!!
> I'd rather shift directions and move into the Juniper program
> which will
> maintain the credibility with the two day exam. Anyway, I
> just hope this
> email shed's some light on the unfair and "un-written" policies of the
> CCIE program. Its been the best learning experience ever!
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> -Ken
> **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
**Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:31:44 GMT-3