Re: Core Knowledge - Don't mis-interpret this

My problem with the CORE section is that I'm coming at this from an
Engineering perspective - that's what my education was in. An engineer
prefers to 'approximate' an answer in order to get an idea for what to
expect. Rather than remember details like the maximum CDP holdtime, they'll
look it up when the exact detail is needed and approximate at other times.
Best thing I learned in College was that '12 is approximately 10' - from
that perspective, 5 minute holdtime is a lot easier to remember than 4
minutes 15 seconds. If I really need to know what the maximum holdtime
value is, that's what the Cisco configuration guides are for.

It's hard for me to break out of that thinking pattern as I really would
prefer understanding the concepts to memorizing that kind of detail. I
think knowing how things work make for a better 'engineer' but memorizing
that kind of detail just slows down the learning process. This is one of
the reasons I would have preferred an interview to a 'pop quiz.'

I'm assuming that with a proctor actually grading the questions rather than
the computer, there will be more leeway for alternative answers - assuming
all the requirements are actually met. There were quite a few well thought
out rebuttals on that STP thread for bpdufilter vs portfast for instance.
Some of the answers met the requirements and others didn't really do it.

As has been said though, all these discussions are interesting but there's
not a lot we can do but adjust our studying methods to take this section
into account. If the attempt is to combat brain dumping and NDA violations
coming out of certain countries, I wouldn't think that the questions need to
be really obscure so in that sense, I'm hoping that a properly prepared CCIE
canidate SHOULD find the questions easy.

Michael

On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Josh Fleishman <josh.fleishman_at_gmail.com>wrote:

> I don't disagree with most of what you say here. Trivia is in the eye of
> the beholder. A CCIE should know both Theory and Configuration.
>
> If the questions being asked all have binary answers, then no worries here.
> However, if there are truly open-ended questions where there are multiple
> valid answers, then I think there's a problem. We can't discuss actual
> questions, so consider a couple of examples adapted from last week's list
> activity.
>
> Example #1: How do you disable spanningtree on a switch port?
>
> There were four or five answers provided in response to this question, all
> arguably valid to different degrees. What if this were a question on the
> core knowledge section, and Cisco wants to see you answer: "configure
> portfast", but instead you answer "configure flexlink"? I don't want to
> get
> hung-up on what's the actual answer here, it's just an example... but both
> could be argued as valid answers, but the guy saying flexlink misses the
> question. Everyone who answers with portfast gets it right and says it's
> easy, everyone else thinks they answered it correctly too, but missed it
> somehow. Fair? I don't think so. You can not even ask for a reread, nor
> is
> there a formal process for issuing a rebuttal.
>
> Example #2: An exhibit is provided showing a failed attempt to configure a
> CDP holdtimer of 5 minutes. Why did this happen?
>
> Well, now we all know 255 seconds is the maximum configurable holdtime for
> CDP, but is it 'fair' for us to be expected to know this detail at exam
> time? Is it sufficient just to say that 5 minutes is beyond the maximum
> value, or do we have to know what the maximum is and state it in our
> answer? Is this distinction left up to the grading proctor, or is
> consistent grading being enforced somehow? Again, this is just an example
> to illustrate my concern.
>
> You could technically miss either of these questions and still display
> accurate knowledge of both theory and configuration. Again, I hope folks
> are
> communicating any similar concerns to Cisco so that they can at least be
> aware of perceived ambiguities by test takers.
>
> -Josh
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Scott Morris <
> smorris_at_internetworkexpert.com> wrote:
>
> > Trivia is a matter of perspective. We've seen a lot of different takes
> on
> > this, and like most things, many different opinions. Those who've
> already
> > passed, the simple response is "you should know it". Which of course,
> > everyone else hates! :)
> >
> > Now... Perspective. If you know whatever "it" is, then it's not trivia,
> > it's knowledge. If you don't, it's likely trivia. Let me give you an
> > example. I do not run EIGRP in production networks for any of my
> clients.
> > Yet, on the written exams, >I< think there's way too many EIGRP
> questions.
> > I find them very irritating and very trivial. I generally grumble and
> > complain for a day or two around my recert time, yet, in the end... I
> > still
> > have to know the material in order to pass the exam and get my recert.
> >
> > Other people may use a lot of EIGRP, and they look at that exam and think
> > it's awesome. Because they are being asked easy questions! it's simply
> a
> > matter of perspective.
> >
> > The questions don't change.
> >
> > In the end, well, it means you have to know BOTH the theory, application
> > AND
> > the configuration techniques of each of these protocols. While you are
> > working on it, it may seem like it sucks. In the end, it will make you
> a
> > better engineer (which is what I think the true goal is) and therefore
> > should prove to be 21 EASY points!
> >
> > I'm not sure how we've established any sense of "inconsistent" or
> "unfairly
> > graded" status though, so I'm interested in hearing details on that. But
> > there are certainly many people complaining and many people saying it was
> > easy.
> >
> > But the perspective is that candidates today should know both the theory
> > and
> > the configuration of each of the tchnologies on the blueprint.
> >
> > HTH,
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> > Josh
> > Fleishman
> > Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 10:37 PM
> > To: Darby Weaver
> > Cc: Larry; Narbik Kocharians; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Re: Core Knowledge - Don't mis-interpret this
> >
> > Trivia implies 'Trivial', and I think that's the point. Yes, CCIEs have
> > had
> > to know this stuff before now, but they didn't have to memorize what a
> lot
> > of us are calling trivia.
> >
> > What I think we're experiencing now is the beginning of backlash against
> a
> > failed beta program. Cisco beta tested the questions used in the CK
> > section
> > before putting them into 'production'. Now we have a situation where
> > qualified candidates are providing QA for these questions, at their cost,
> > time, effort and emotional investment. The feedback from those who have
> > failed at the hands of the CK section is that these questions or
> > inconsistent, unfairly graded, and weighted far too heavily. As in any
> > situation when a production release proves faulty, there are typically
> two
> > options: 1) The production release can be recalled, an apology issued,
> > and
> > alternative solutions are pursued, or 2) The production release can be
> > adjusted in the wild, quietly, until the kinks are worked out. The first
> > option is what a lof of folks are hoping for, but I think we'll end up
> > seeing something closer to the second option. Unfortunately, in the
> > meantime some qualified candidates are going to fail, and complain
> > (rightfully so), and possibly even give-up their pursuit. Eventually
> Cisco
> > will refine these questions, removing those causing conflict and life
> goes
> > on.
> >
> > I have some concerns about what this 'revised' CCIE really means. It
> feels
> > like it's significantly diminished from what it had been up until
> recently.
> > At 79 points for the lab, it's implied that the CK section is worth 21
> > points since you have to score an 80 overall to pass, and you cannot pass
> > if
> > you fail the CK section. So, 21% of a passing CCIE score is based off of
> > one's ability to correctly answer 3 non-ccie level questions (often
> > referred
> > to as "easy" by those who pass). Accordingly, the lab portion of the
> exam
> > has been reduced from 100 points to 79 points. Presumably the lab
> section
> > is going to be easier now by either having less 3-4pt questions, covering
> > less topics, or having fewer tasks per topic. The meaning of having a
> CCIE
> > number greater than 24000 could be considered to be less significant than
> > those possessing numbers less than 24000. In other words, the CCIE exam
> > may
> > be just as difficult to pass overall, but the definition of what
> qualifies
> > you to be an 'expert' has changed substantially.
> >
> > In case it's not obvious, I'm not pleased with this development and I
> hope
> > everyone else who isn't pleased is voicing their concerns to Cisco as
> well.
> > It might even make a difference.
> >
> > -Josh
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Darby Weaver <ccie.weaver_at_gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hey,
> > >
> > > Let's face it a lot of people took short cuts to qualify for the lab
> > > portion
> > > of the exam.
> > >
> > > Now that we are all over that one.
> > >
> > > A lot of people take short cuts to pass the lab or maybe people just
> use
> > > "gunmen" to take the lab for them? Who knows...?
> > >
> > > But Cisco must be more right than wrong given the number of people who
> > are
> > > freaking out and blaming the open-ended questions on their failure.
> > >
> > > In any event, all of us who still want to be CCIE's now have to keep up
> > > with
> > > the trivia...
> > >
> > > 1. Command Config Guides
> > >
> > > 2. Command References
> > >
> > > 3. Technotes and FAQ's
> > >
> > > 4. Networkers Techtorials, Slides, and other Prep Materials...
> > >
> > > 5. Oh yes... RFC's too.
> > >
> > >
> > > Are you telling me that so many of the CCIE's before never had to know
> > this
> > > stuff?
> > >
> > >
> > > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________________________________
> > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> >
> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Sun Apr 19 2009 - 21:59:08 ART