Re: Petition: Revamp or Replace OEQ

Good one.

To bad the vendors I asked can't anwer the OEQ I sent them correctly yet.

I've seen some OEQ that were ridiculously easy and I guess it is the luck of
the draw.

However, there are some that google can't find and some not found easily.

Hey wait... I did find one in a Cisco Press Book published back in like
2002...

Simple enough issue if you'd seen it or been presented with it I suppose...

We need a boxed game called:

CCIE Trivial Pursuit.

Some of these questions are simply not being covered by the references you'd
expect.

I am going to verify this one with the Cisco Press Book that is latest on
the subject to be 100% for sure. Let's say it interests me.

I fugure instructors who teach the stuff ought to have a fair grasp of
things and whether or not they can deduce a solution in under 30 minutes -
correctly?

Maybe that's the intent?

On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 1:05 PM, William McCall <william.mccall_at_gmail.com>wrote:

> Call the waaaaaambulance.
>
> I passed it with the core knowledge section. Many others have too. If you
> didn't pass because of the core knowledge section, Cisco intended for you to
> not pass.
>
> Play the game or get left out. Petitioning Cisco to dumb down the exam to
> make people happy isn't going to work. I think the next thing they should do
> is include the requirement of knowing full PDU structures.
>
> For people who failed solely because of core knowledge, I'm sorry. Pick
> yourselves back up and start again. Moaning and groaning about it just makes
> you look whiny to people who had to do it. Failure is one of the things that
> you must learn to accept in life, even if it is at $1400 plus travel and
> lodging a pop. Just because you paid for the opportunity doesn't mean you
> earned the cert.
>
> An example, when I was going for my CCNP, I failed the ISCW 3 times before
> I finally passed. On the 4th one, I thought, "I should probably just give up
> on this and go get my CCIE written," but instead, I went back and took it
> and finally passed it.
>
> If you have some concrete examples (no NDA breaking, please!) of questions
> that cannot be solved, I will be more than happy to find the answers for
> you. I will take a maximum of 10 good questions.
>
> Ladies and Gents, Cisco does not really want you to fail, but they DO want
> to have prestige in the CCIE program.
>
> --WM
>
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Darby Weaver <darby.weaver_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Seems like we need a petition to make the point clear.
>>
>> Now if some of you guys don't think that some of the OEQ's are fair... I
>> have to ask the question is repeating "Hearsay" even close the breaking
>> the
>> NDA?
>>
>> Because if I were to show you some questions that I've run across you
>> might now find them so easy and if the instructors themselves can't find
>> reasonable answers... in a reasonable time-frame... (Ummm.... Candidates
>> only get 30 minutes for 4 of these puppies and no use of Google.com btw).
>>
>> I've got to ask you? Who are we trying to get to pass the CCIE Lab?
>>
>> Disclaimer: See the first batch of OEQ. Straight forward mostly.
>>
>> If your questions start asking "Why"...
>>
>> You might as well just hand in your lab guide and catch your plane and go
>> home... Unless you know you nailed them and did not second guess
>> yourself.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Darby Weaver
>> Network Engineer
>>
>> 407-802-7394
>> darbyweaver_at_yahoo.com
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> William McCall, CCIE #25044
>

-- 
Darby Weaver
Network Engineer
407-802-7394
darbyweaver_at_yahoo.com
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net