From: Peter van Oene (pvo@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon May 27 2002 - 19:05:48 GMT-3
Maybe you just read slow :-) I thought it was good to read it through
somewhat for a dependencies test, but also from a time management
perspective and finally, for some confidence. I found nerves to be one of
the biggest killers and reading through the test gave me an idea that yes,
I can likely get a number of points quickly and also that the things I'm
not sure of can likely be researched. Further, this enabled me to properly
gauge how much time I had to spend on various issues. For example, if I
knew I was going to breeze through 3,4,5, I might spend a few more minutes
on 2.
However, I wouldn't spend more than 20-25 minutes doing this. When I
wrote, it was my goal to have read through the lab, diagrammed it and
properly laid out my address matrices within the first hour. I should note
that the lab I wrote was the 2 day rev almost 3 years ago.
The best thing to do is think about what your approach is going to be based
upon your own strengths/weaknesses and stick with that approach in all your
practising. For what its worth, I type pretty fast and figured the time i
might save by my speed would be well used making sure I applied my speed to
the correct configurations. In any case, having a set routine will help
you when you sit the real thing as it tends to calm the nerves.
At 02:51 PM 5/27/2002 -0700, Jake wrote:
>Chris,
> I beg to differ with Peter on this one. As someone who only sat it
> once... my opinion
>may not be as weighty, but here goes:
> If you're a solid candidate, don't waste your time reading it all
> through. Although
>it is always a good idea to know what you'll be doing before you do it...
>in the Lab,
>where time is a very precious resource, you may not want to invest that
>resource into
>simply reading the requirements more than you have to. I know that
>cross-section
>dependencies are a possible concern, but no CCIE I spoke to, including
>yours truly, had
>any real ones that would require you to read the entire requirements through.
> I did read through when I went, only because that was the advice I
> had heard... but
>it took exactly half an hour of my 8-hour time to do it, and in retrospect
>I don't think
>it helped me at all! I would still flip through it so you know how much
>you'll be doing
>and can plan your time a little.
> If you do decide to read it, I would certainly not read it twice
> because now we're
>talking 1 hour wasted (12.5% of your total time). If I had to do it all
>over again, I
>would only read or skim (depending on the difficulty) each section when I
>got to it, to
>deal with any dependencies within the section.
>
>Good luck.
>
>IMHO,
>Jake
>9102
>
>--- Peter van Oene <pvo@usermail.com> wrote:
> > Read it twice. It's not that long a read, and you really need to
> > understand the whole picture.
> >
> > At 10:35 PM 5/22/2002 -0500, Christopher E. Miller wrote:
> > >Is there any real advantage to reading through the entire test first????
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:59:10 GMT-3