From: Capt.Spock (capt.spock@gmail.com)
Date: Mon May 16 2005 - 18:25:08 GMT-3
My 2 cents... At this point I am pursuing CCIE for sake of knowledge.
For me CCIE exam is just a bench mark of whether I can implement what
I know in 8 hrs.
My MCSE,CNE,CCNA,CCNP certs expired and I did not care to renew them
because they are useless. I am pretty sure if Cisco does not act then
CCIE will soon be come useless.
If anybody really believes that things are going bad then they should
atleast notify Cisco.
May the force be with u!
On 5/16/05, Dillon Yang <dillony@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dillon's analytic data is aboveboard that is from the public
> knowledge where the sun DOES SHINE!
> It is a shame to ignore the fact that THERE ARE cheatings in the
> ccie lab exam. Just do a search on GOOGLE!
> Do you remember this:
> <qoute>
> router guy <cert_pri00@hotmail.com> to ccielab
> More options Apr 11
> hello ther Notice guys
> mohanad_m_magdi@hotmail.com hope_ccie@hotmail.com
> ccie_wanted@yahoo.com
> some_creature@hotmail.com
> tres_ores@hotmail.com
> above email add is one swindler guys email address
> this guys come from egypt, he guys is swindler
> by changed changed email address
> don't believe them
> </qoute>
>
> We were all believing the ccie lab exam is a pure technology exam,
> but it is not now by Dillon's exposure that must impact someone's
> benefits meanwhile profit the candidates, so some abuse it and some
> think about it and some keep silence. In particular, CCIE has lost its
> aura in PRC. In a interview, a CTO said: "CCIE is just a paper." Why
> Dillon would spend time and money on the pursuing the certification is
> just believing its justness.
> Yes, I must admit it, we all candidates can learn a lot of things
> from the blueprint and Cisco's solution thats great, but the CCIE lab
> exam is so-so for it turns a deaf ear to the cheating.
> Regarding to 'no partial credit' rule, its normal thing. In the GRE
> or TOFEL there are also a lot of selections that cost 1 point or 2,
> say, you spent 5 minutes on a 2-point one and spent 10 minutes on a
> 1-point one, in result, you won the 2-point one and lost the 1-point
> one. So that is the scores reflecting your level and also is subjected
> to the normal distribution.
> Dillon say again, "Do not be a blind donkey! Not only work hard as a
> donkey, but also find a way out."
> It is the time for CCIE program to take action.
>
> Best regard to all.
> Dillon
>
>
> On 5/16/05, Scott Morris <swm@emanon.com> wrote:
> > Whenever you take great math which involves a theorhetical number pulled
> > from someplace where the sun doesn't shine, we end up with "statistics"!
> > While yes, the truth is in the numbers, they can also be manipulated to tell
> > any story you'd like.
> >
> > With the 'no partial credit' rule, we very often find people who "came
> > really close" But assuming you have 20 point sections at 5 points each, and
> > each point section has 10 items. If I successfully complete 9 of the 10 in
> > EVERY section, technically I completed 90% of the exam correctly. However
> > my score would be 0. So thinking you came close and really coming close are
> > two differerent ideas!
> >
> > Personally, I think time would be better spent figuring out how traffic
> > shaping works, or tracking down whoever came up with the theory about token
> > buckets so we can burn them in effigy. But if we want to analyze the crap
> > out of a score report and postulate on the global woes about who does or
> > doesn't pass, that's an individual's decision. Just not one (IMHO) that is
> > well-placed.
> >
> > In the end, 80 points matter. And when people pass you never see your
> > score. So you can believe you got 97 points all you want, but you REALLY
> > may only have 80. Concentrate on passing. Score reports are meant to give
> > you an indicator of what areas you need more work in...
> >
> > Scott
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> > Daniel Ginsburg
> > Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2005 1:46 PM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Re: Dillon's open critique about CCIE lab exam
> >
> > 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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