From: Angelo De Guzman (a.deguzman@wesolv.ph.fujitsu.com)
Date: Fri Oct 06 2006 - 03:32:00 ART
hi Alex,
Usually if you ask a question in such a way that you demonstrated a clear
understanding of the technology you would get a positive response from the
proctor. In my experience usually I would ask a question that I already know
the answer and see the response of the proctor. Just to check. If you do above
and still did not get a positive feedback. As Scott usually quotes during my
bootcamp experience, ask the proctor " why do you hate me?" hehe kidding only.
Yes it is really better to read the question several times before you ask
the proctor. Most of the times if you do this you might answer or even find the
solution to your question.
Angelo
Alex De Gruiter (AU) (10/6/06 12:46 PM):
>
>Hey Guys,
>
>I've read many, many times on this list people mentioning that the
>"proctor is your friend" and if you need clarification the "proctor is
>there to help". Well, I recently sat (and failed) the lab exam; I
>evidently wasn't as ready for the lab as I thought I was - that's cool,
>I know the areas I need to improve. However I do have a question along
>the lines of proctor assistance - or lack thereof.
>
>Literally every time I asked a question in my lab, I was told "Read the
>question" (a rather redundant activity I thought, given that I was
>referencing the question in my line of enquiry!). Now, I don't expect
>the proctor to give the answer away, not at all, but I am confused by
>comments about how helpful the proctor was. I actually reached a point
>with my proctor where I gave up asking questions because I already knew
>the answer: "read the question".
>
>I can't give concrete examples due to the NDA, however I know for a fact
>that there were at least 3 or 4 questions that could be answered using
>more than 1 methodology. However the proctor told me, in no uncertain
>terms, that he would not assist in my choice. Has anyone had similar
>experiences with proctors? In these situations, are we marked down for
>choosing a methodology other than the one Cisco expected us to use?
>
>Alex
>
>******************************************************************************
> - NOTICE FROM DIMENSION DATA AUSTRALIA
>This message is confidential, and may contain proprietary or legally
privileged information. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it immediately.
>
>Internet communications are not secure. You should scan this message and any
attachments for viruses. Under no circumstances do we accept liability for any
loss or damage which may result from your receipt of this message or any
attachments.
>******************************************************************************
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>***********************
>No virus was detected in the attachment no filename
>
>Your mail has been scanned by InterScan MSS.
>***********-***********
>
***********************
No virus was detected in the attachment no filename
Your mail has been scanned by InterScan MSS.
***********-***********
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Nov 01 2006 - 07:29:04 ART