From: Pc9101 (kieu@hn.vnn.vn)
Date: Wed Feb 12 2003 - 18:26:22 GMT-3
I guess that Cisco doesn't want to explain your mistake because it could
help you remember almost the lab.
Then the the lab become less challenge or they have to change the lab weekly
;-)
Do you think so ?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Young" <cc_young@pacbell.net>
To: "Logan, Harold" <loganh@mccfl.edu>
Cc: "Chuck Church" <ccie8776@rochester.rr.com>; "Colin Barber"
<Colin.Barber@telewest.co.uk>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 1:25 PM
Subject: Re: Surprising score report
> This is a great Idea, However by purchasing a rescore you will only delay
the agony of getting a final answer for 3 weeks or so, and you will not be
given an answer as to what you did wrong on the lab. The rescore will tell
you NOTHING about what you did wrong other than the report in the same
format you got in your score report. They will not even tell you if you
gained a few additional points. The answer wil be either yes you passed, or
no
> you did not. They will not even answer a specific question you ask with a
response something like:
>
> We are not in a position to give you an answer. If you want the answer to
your question please refer to the documentation CD.
>
> The official policy is not to give ANYTHING out.
> IMHO
>
>
> "Logan, Harold" wrote:
>
> > This is something a lot of people, incluing myself, have found to be
pretty frustrating, specifically that you don't find out what you did wrong,
even if you pay for a rescore. At Networkers in San Diego, Parkhurst
addressed the issue, and his answer to it was that the CCIE program is a
testing program, not a training program. I don't know about you guys, but to
me it'd be worth $250, even $500 easily to find out what I did wrong on the
lab.
> >
> > Since the labs are rotated out every thirty days, I don't see why they
couldn't release this info thirty days after a lab attempt. Of course, I'm
sure some schmuck somewhere would start collecting them and selling them or
posting them somewhere.
> >
> > Ok, I'm done ranting.
> >
> > Hal
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Chuck Church [mailto:ccie8776@rochester.rr.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 9:36 AM
> > > To: Colin Barber; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: Re: Surprising score report
> > >
> > >
> > > Not true. In my final attempt, I did something a certain way
> > > involving a
> > > routing protocol to meet a requirement. There was also
> > > another way to do
> > > it, which I realized after I'd done it my way, which worked.
> > > I had enough
> > > doubt in my mind about which way was better so I asked the
> > > proctor. I told
> > > him there were at least two ways to solve it, and I did it
> > > this way. I was
> > > told that they were really looking for the other way. I
> > > asked if I'd get
> > > the points for doing it my way. His response was 'possibly'.
> > > I'm not much
> > > of a gambler, so I redid it. So with 45 minutes left, I
> > > started changing
> > > this and watched as my IGP, EGPs, and everything on top of that broke.
> > > Pretty scary. But the change worked and everything
> > > straightened out. Had
> > > this been the two day lab, I would have argued the next day
> > > about doing it
> > > my way, but with the 1 day format, you don't have that
> > > luxury. Remember,
> > > 'correct' in the lab is in the eyes of the proctor, not you!
> > >
> > > Chuck Church
> > > CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Colin Barber" <Colin.Barber@telewest.co.uk>
> > > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 8:41 AM
> > > Subject: RE: Surprising score report
> > >
> > >
> > > > There may be multiple ways of doing a task and there are
> > > all correct.
> > > There
> > > > is no Cisco way. You just have to meet the objectives exactly
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Richard Young [mailto:cc_young@pacbell.net]
> > > > Sent: 10 February 2003 23:03
> > > > To: Dimitris Vassilopoulos
> > > > Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > > Subject: Re: Surprising score report
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I did the same.
> > > > I recommend forgetting the rescore. The CCIE team is very
> > > inflexible in
> > > > their rescores in my opinion. You also will not get an
> > > explanation as
> > > > to why you did not get points. Remember that there are many ways of
> > > > doing a task in an exam, but the only way that counts is
> > > the Cisco way.
> > > > It will cost you $250 and you are better off going back to
> > > the books and
> > > > spending the money on more rack time to prepare for your next test.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Dimitris Vassilopoulos wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Has anyone experience a confidence of passing the lab right after
> > > > > leaving the center
> > > > > while the received score report showed a failure at about 50%????
> > > > >
> > > > > If so, do you know someone who requested a re-open? What happened
> > > > > afterwards?
> > > > >
> > > > > Any input is welcomed.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Dimitris
> > > > > .
> > > > .
> > > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ------------
> > > ----
> > > > Live Life in Broadband
> > > > www.telewest.co.uk
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The information transmitted is intended only for the person
> > > or entity to
> > > which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> > > material.
> > > > Statements and opinions expressed in this e-mail may not
> > > represent those
> > > of the company. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or
> > > other use of,
> > > or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by
> > > persons or
> > > entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If
> > > you received
> > > this in error, please contact the sender immediately and
> > > delete the material
> > > from any computer.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > ==============================================================
> > > ==============
> > > ==
> > > > .
> > > .
> > .
> .
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Mar 01 2003 - 11:06:20 GMT-3