Re: Petition: Revamp or Replace OEQ

Good point Rick,

The CCIE v4.0 New Lab Blueprint was a testament to this.

On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Rick Tyrell <rtyrell_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Brad, Scott,
>
> It seems that you don't think Cisco can make mistakes? Everything that
> comes out of Cisco's mouth is Gold? You guys are unbelievable.
>
> William drop the attitude man....and just because you work on
> "pre-deployment functional testing on code" doesn't make us any closer
> friends.
>
> Cisco is there to make money, that's the bottom line.
>
> Good luck with CCIE studies all.
>
> On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Darby Weaver <darby.weaver_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Now see this is viable solution to the problem.
>>
>> 1. Registered Lab Attendees have the same limitations as lab candidates.
>>
>> 2. Pre-Lab 3-6 months before a lab date (6 months seems more practical).
>>
>> 3. Adminstration Cost - Say $125-200 for the 30 minute test.
>>
>> 4. No repeat questions.
>>
>> 5. No reference materials.
>>
>> 6. Maybe scratch #1 and if you fail the OEQ Mini-Test - Take is a warning
>> to
>> go back and study for 4-6 months.
>>
>> Other ideas?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Scott Morris <smorris_at_ine.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Statistics. The object isn't to test your knowledge of the entire
>> > blueprint, just a subset thereof.
>> >
>> > If it were done the way >I< would design it, you'd get some initial
>> > questions, and if you failed them, you wouldn't even be able to see the
>> rest
>> > of the lab. THAT would solve the braindump problem. But wouldn't that
>> piss
>> > you off even more, to go, and 30 minutes later you're kicked out?
>> >
>> > On the bright side, you get the see the entire lab, and you'll get to
>> see
>> > exactly what/how things are being asked. The next time you'll pass.
>> >
>> > People have this problem with written tests all the time. The thing
>> that
>> > makes this format harder is that it isn't "multiple guess". That, and
>> when
>> > people fail a $125 test, they're irritated, but not quite as much!
>> >
>> > Scott
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Nadeem Rafi wrote:
>> >
>> > why only 4 questions.... its quite unfair. questions should be gone as
>> for
>> > dumpers troubleshooting can do the trick. If these are not gone then at
>> > least should be increased so that a question should not cost 1400 USD
>> which
>> > in many countries is more than few months salary.
>> > just few thoughts....
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 8:11 PM, Scott Morris <smorris_at_ine.com> <
>> smorris_at_ine.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Let's not be too far off the beaten path here...
>> >
>> > First of all, missing one question is just fine. Missing two will cause
>> > you to have an expensive lunch. So keep with the accurate program here
>> > (Maurilio had these details long ago).
>> >
>> > Now, I may be part of the minority (and arguable since I don't have to
>> > take them), but I am in favor of the OEQs. I think the idea is very
>> > much worthwhile.
>> >
>> > Now, I sit back and hear a lot about the quality of the questions from
>> > people, and see the folks who SHOULD be passing yet are not, which
>> > indicates a problem. But it's one that's simple to fix as part of a QA
>> > process from Cisco. (That's not Question/Answer by the way)
>> >
>> > If you have QUALITY questions, they can achieve the goal needed, and can
>> > easily be argued that those who miss them do so based on techincal merit
>> > rather than some other absurd reason.
>> >
>> > Boycotting's an interesting idea, but unless you have some plan to reach
>> > EVERYONE out there and make a serious impact the quantity of people from
>> > GS going will merely make it look like a statistical blip.
>> >
>> > But if everyone who feels wronged by the OEQs files a certification
>> > support ticket, it will force the group to review the questions, and any
>> > anomolies or "bad questions" will be more easily recognized by the "in
>> > your face"escalation process.
>> >
>> > Just my two cents. (As opposed to $1,400)
>> >
>> > Scott
>> >
>> >
>> > Darby Weaver wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Well we could just say that...
>> >
>> > However, Cisco is a Marketing Company and is a For-Profit Company and
>> the
>> > CCIE Program has become a profit-making venture.
>> >
>> > I think the term Boycott is a bit stronger and has a little more effect.
>> >
>> > When the number of CCIE's available for Cisco Partners starts to turn
>> > NEGATIVE...
>> >
>> > Cisco has a choice, either Get Rid of the OEQ...
>> >
>> > OR...
>> >
>> > REVAMP the Cisco Partner Program...
>> >
>> > Maybe there is a 3rd Option... or 4th...
>> >
>> > But if there are no CCIE's... the CCDE is likely to take a tumble...
>> >
>> > No CCDE's what happens to the CCA?
>> >
>> >
>> > It's got quite the Domino-Effect...
>> >
>> > Let's see how many people active on this list care to voice their own
>> > opinions...
>> >
>> > Taking the CCIE Lab and Failing based on "One Question"... is ludicrous
>> >
>> >
>> > at
>> >
>> >
>> > best.
>> >
>> >
>> > There are 4 questions. 3 will earn a candidate 21 points...
>> >
>> > Lose 1 question more and you lose $1400.00 + Travel and Expenses.
>> >
>> > More in some countries as I understand it.
>> >
>> >
>> > $2000-2500.00 for 1 question?
>> >
>> > Excuse me but this is ABSURD!
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Mark Matters <markccie_at_gmail.com> <
>> markccie_at_gmail.com>
>>
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Your email looks like it's missing a few words, confusing.
>> > But I agree. GET RID OF THE OEQ
>> >
>> > On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 12:35 PM, 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
>> >
>> > 407-802-7394darbyweaver_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
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> >
>> > -
>> > "The more I learn the less I know". This is incredibly frustrating to
>> >
>> >
>> > me.
>> >
>> >
>> > 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
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

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