From: Jay Hennigan (jay@xxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon May 06 2002 - 23:32:52 GMT-3
On Tue, 7 May 2002, Nick Shah wrote:
> I have heard a lot of people who attempt the lab come back and say, they
> knew everything, but lacked strategy. Strategy is probably the third factor
> (after of course the obvious ones, like not knowing enough and time) making
> a difference between *making* it or *breaking* it.
>
> What exactly is the strategy ?
>
> * Is it the skill to read between the lines (as to what the Q in the lab
> says) and determine a solution
I would say that this is part of a good strategy. Having a study partner
and developing scenarios and questions can help here. The strategic part
is, from the wording of the question, determining what the exam writer
is asking for, specifically. Practice in developing scenario questions
that you run by another person (or this list) will help to get you "inside
the head" of an exam writer.
> * Or is it knowing all the relevant ways (official standard IOS ways ) of
> doing a thing ? ( I call it ways to change a light bulb :)
This isn't what I would call strategy. It's knowledge. Look for the
zinger out of left field that isn't necessarily "official standard" as
well. I mean, people don't really put question marks in hostnames or
filter networks with the third octet divisible by four, do they?
> * Or is it absolute understanding of topics on hand ? (well, I think this is
> required for core topics, but hell I dont seem to agree that every CCIE out
> there would claim to have absolute understanding or even closer to it for
> obscure topics)
Nope. Not strategy, but certainly one way to improve your chances of
passing, and practically impossible for most humans.
> * I have seen really knowledgeable people (not just claims, but they have
> exhibited it as well) failing the lab due to this reason ...
I would list strategy as a combination of the following:
* Being able to read between the lines of the questions.
* Time management skills.
* Point management/test taking skills. Similar to time management but
with a different philosophy. Determine from the test what points you
can get quickly, what high point items will take more time, what the
dependencies are. Example: If I can't get section three working, then
I'll lose all of section four because four depends on three. Even though
three has a low point value, it's worth extra time because of the
dependency.
* Know how to search the CD, and when to. Do you go to the CD as soon as
you're stuck on something (probably not the best choice), or first get
as many points as possible, then go to the CD for something that has
dependencies, has high point value, or your solution is working but it
doesn't seem to be what the question asks for.
* Knowing when to ask the proctor for clarification and how to phrase
the question to show that you know how to solve it but are trying to
resolve ambiguities in the question. How can I ask this to get the
biggest hint or ensure I'm on the right path without the appearance
of asking for the answer?
Strategy in the lab is very close to what is often called "gamesmanship".
-- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Administration - jay@west.net NetLojix Communications, Inc. - http://www.netlojix.com/ WestNet: Connecting you to the planet. 805 884-6323
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:58:52 GMT-3