From: Dillon Yang (dillony@gmail.com)
Date: Mon May 16 2005 - 03:35:25 GMT-3
Hi, Daniel:
You are right on the average, but we are not sure about it for Cisco
keep it as a secret. Let us suppose Cisco do stick to the 80-rule, we
can get the average by the ccie list on NMC and "CCIE verification"
page on cisco.com. We get this:
ccie number date increasement days ratio/workday
14645 2005-5-13
14551 2005-4-7 94 36 1.865079365
14351 2005-2-19 200 47 3.039513678
14251 2004-12-9 100 72 0.992063492
14063 2004-11-8 188 31 4.331797235
13949 2004-10-18 114 21 3.87755102
13746 2004-8-2 203 77 1.883116883
13637 2004-7-14 109 19 4.097744361
13541 2004-6-29 96 15 4.571428571
13332 2004-5-24 209 36 4.146825397
total 1313 354 2.649313963
And We have no knowledge about the actual attemps per workday, let's
use the number 60 by global range, so we get the ratio per attempt is
2.6493/60=0.044155
You'll find the x is about 1.645, when the F(x) is 1-0.044155, so we
get the formula that (80-u)/b=1.645
And you know (100-u)/b=3.09,
So, We can get the b is 13.8408, and the u is 57.2318
Yes, the average score 57.2318 may be subjected to our experience,
but it should be alterative for the uncertain factors as the list
above.
The first PROBLEM is: The ratio per attempt 0.077282 after
cancellation of Hongkong Location in Sep-2004 is higher than the ratio
per attempt 0.044155 from the date 2004-5-24 to the date 2005-5-13.
The less attempt, the more pass ratio! WHY? And the ratios of
diffetent areas are also suspicious.
The second PROBLEM is : you can search the key word "rack YY
ICMPLOGGER" by GOOGLE and you'll get the true materials that was
finished in 2003 or early. So in the past years, the materials must
had been disseminated all over the world since you can access it by
internet.
The third PROBLEM is : We are in an unfair game! CCIE program did
not deliver the goods that it promised to change the contents of lab
exam periodically Because the old materials topology has been found in
recent attempts. When we are all study Cisco technology step by step
and failed again and again, someones had got the short cut without
CCIE program any suspicions.
Best regard
Dillon
On 5/16/05, Daniel Ginsburg <dginsburg@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/14/05, Dillon Yang <dillony@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > 1.1 Theoretic analysis
> > Regarding the scores of any exam, it is subjected to the normal
> > distribution. For normal distribution, the F(x) indicate the
> > probability from 0.0000 to 1.0000, the x is from 3.09 to 3.09, for
> > example, when x is 0, the F(x) that means all probability below 0 is
> > 0.5, and when x is 1.854, the F(x) will be about 0.9682. You can find
> > the value by a common statistical table.
> > Dillon can standardization change the scores that is from 0 to 100 to
> > the x in F(x) by the formula x=(S-u)/b. The u means the average of all
> > scores, and the b is the something of tolerance. Because the average
> > of a score must be 50, so Dillon get u equal 50, and Dillon have
> > 3.09=(100-50)/b, so the b equal 16.1813. Now Dillon can get that x
> > equals 1.854 when the S equals 80, 1.854=(80-50)/16.1813. That means
> > the 0.9682 of the total candidate will be rejected if Cisco stick to
> > its rule of 80. Dillon n other words, only 0.0318 of the total
> > candidates can pass the lab exam if the 80-pass rule is the truth.
>
> There's insufficiently grounded assumption here: you postulate that
> the average score is 50. I believe that it is more than that. Remember
> how often you hear "I almost nailed it, but missed only few points". I
> don't think these people are liars. If average is more than 50 then
> assuming normal distribution much more than 3.18% of attempts are
> successful.
>
> [snip]
>
> > 2 Quirky Wording
> > Maybe Cisco noticed that something abnormity, and adopted the
> > nonsensical wording. Cisco maybe believe that the changing wording can
> > hold out the cheating without essential modification. Yes, essential
> > modifications will be more expensive than only changing wording, but
> > we are not all the master degree of literature, even if we are not all
> > that english is his mother tongue. Remember? Dillon n the written
> > exam, the candidate will have more 30 minutes if his mother tongue is
> > not english while the american can get only 2 hours. Why not in lab
> > exam?
> > The wording is really efficient for those cheating, and for those that
> > not cheating, too. Did Cisco ever think about that if an engineer
> > designs or implements a network for his clients, his client maybe ask
> > unintelligible questions or requirements but he will explain it
> > throughout with common wording to help the engineer to finish the job.
> > Now, CCIE lab exam gradually becomes a english exam, not technique
> > exam, Dillon MHO.
>
> While I'm not a native speaker and my English is way too far from
> perfect I found wording of the exam clear enough to understand almost
> every task. When I wasn't sure I asked proctor who was very nice and
> answered most of my questions.
>
> --
> dg
> #14229
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 03 2005 - 10:11:58 GMT-3