Re: OEQ NDA Question? from Brian McGahan on 2009-09-05 (Ccielab archives 09/2009)

From: Brian McGahan <bmcgahan_at_ine.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2009 21:35:47 -0500

Joe,

The real question should be... who in their right mind would run
Exchange in the first place?!?

;)

Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593 (R&S/SP/Security)
bmcgahan_at_INE.com

Internetwork Expert, Inc.
http://www.INE.com

On Sep 5, 2009, at 8:46 PM, "Joseph L. Brunner"
<joe_at_affirmedsystems.com> wrote:

> OH,
>
> I thought it was time to discuss a real challenge instead of the
> QEQ's. In the time what about 5,000 people have become CCIE's with
> the QEQ's on the exam, about
> 15 people have become MCA's.
>
> Love or hate Microsoft- at least they provide a real challenge for
> those up to it.
>
> -Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim [mailto:timcurci_at_roadrunner.com]
> Sent: Saturday, September 05, 2009 8:08 PM
> To: 'John Pelletier'; rwest_at_zyedge.com; dennis.worth_at_gmail.com; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> ; 'Manoj (DS-1)Nanda'; Joseph L. Brunner
> Subject: RE: OEQ NDA Question?
>
> Why are we talking about Microsoft?
>
> Did I miss the thread that invited that discussion?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of John
> Pelletier
> Sent: Saturday, September 05, 2009 7:27 PM
> To: timcurci_at_roadrunner.com; rwest_at_zyedge.com; dennis.worth_at_gmail.com;
> ccielab_at_groupstudy.com; Manoj (DS-1)Nanda; Joseph L. Brunner
> Subject: RE: OEQ NDA Question?
>
> Well everyone has an opinion I would say this-the exchange cert
> below while
> it
> is exhaustive is a one trick pony which would be the equivalent of a
> switching
> only guru vs the CCIE lab that covers many technologies. On the OEQ
> the
> questions cover the same breadth of topics while the exchange
> questions are
> exactly that exchange questions.
>
> --- On Sat, 9/5/09, Joseph L. Brunner <joe_at_affirmedsystems.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: Joseph L. Brunner <joe_at_affirmedsystems.com>
> Subject: RE: OEQ NDA Question?
> To: "John Pelletier" <john.pelletier_at_altima-group.com>,
> "timcurci_at_roadrunner.com" <timcurci_at_roadrunner.com>,
> "rwest_at_zyedge.com"
> <rwest_at_zyedge.com>, "dennis.worth_at_gmail.com" <dennis.worth_at_gmail.com>,
> "ccielab_at_groupstudy.com" <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>, " Manoj (DS-1)
> Nanda"
> <MNanda_at_drs-tsi.com>
> Date: Saturday, September 5, 2009, 6:44 PM
>
>
> Actually,
>
> How do you think the MSFT MCA board review is compared to these QEQ's?
>
> You have to speak and invoke passion and explain a complex solution,
> only to
> be challenged on exact details of your proposed solution from a
> group of
> industry veterans... all just to QUALIFY for a grueling 2 to 18 month
> process
> to achieve certification (if you ever achieve it). Some of the best
> Exchange
> guys in the world who write widely used books and several 100 page
> blogs are
> only Exchange Apprentices- and didn't not get their Exchange Ranger
> (MCA)
> certifications...
>
> I think Cisco is still quite a bit easier...
>
> -Joe
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of John
> Pelletier
> Sent: Saturday, September 05, 2009 6:36 PM
> To: timcurci_at_roadrunner.com; rwest_at_zyedge.com; dennis.worth_at_gmail.com;
> ccielab_at_groupstudy.com; Manoj (DS-1)Nanda
> Subject: Re: OEQ NDA Question?
>
> In theory they do-it is called the written. The OEQ thing is over
> the top,
> if
> they want to do this then get rid of the written at least. AND then
> add MPLS
> and VPN to a R&S exam while having a SP and Security tracks stinks
> of a MS
> style money grab. Oh and add to that get it done in 8 hrs.
>
> --- On Sat, 9/5/09, Nanda, Manoj (DS-1) <MNanda_at_drs-tsi.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: Nanda, Manoj (DS-1) <MNanda_at_drs-tsi.com>
> Subject: Re: OEQ NDA Question?
> To: timcurci_at_roadrunner.com, rwest_at_zyedge.com, dennis.worth_at_gmail.com,
> ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> Date: Saturday, September 5, 2009, 5:06 PM
>
>
> It would be great if they had a separtate comprehensive OEQ
> prometric test
> rather than combining it with the lab to cause people have this
> freaking
> expansive travel and lunch tough to digest paying from your hard
> earned
> money!!
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com <nobody_at_groupstudy.com>
> To: 'Ryan West' <rwest_at_zyedge.com>; 'Dennis Worth' <dennis.worth_at_gmail.com
> >;
> ccielab_at_groupstudy.com <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Sat Sep 05 16:17:31 2009
> Subject: RE: OEQ NDA Question?
>
> It is just amazing that "people" did not see this coming a few
> months ago.
> As I stated in May, the QEQs are not a statistically valid method of
> testing. Many in this forum who already have multiple CCIEs (3 or 4)
> disagreed... This is kind of funny. Cisco will be able to play games
> by
> asking 4-5 subjective questions that they feel should be easily
> answered by
> a qualified CCIE candidate (whatever that means). If Cisco is going to
> continue with the QEQs, they should eliminate the $350 pre-
> qualification
> exam for each track if they feel the pre-qualification exams have been
> compromised or they should do more to secure the lab exam itself.
> Maybe the
> pre-qualification exam should be a written (pencil and paper)
> proctored
> exam.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of Ryan
> West
> Sent: Saturday, September 05, 2009 3:57 PM
> To: Dennis Worth; <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com> <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
> Subject: RE: OEQ NDA Question?
>
> I've heard and wondered the same thing. Unfortunately, no one at
> Cisco is
> likely to speak up and give us that answer. Part of the reason I
> have said
> to never underestimate the OEQ's is that 4 months after the exam, I
> just
> stumbled upon the answer to one of my OEQs. I had two questions
> that were
> like this.
>
> I have a little theory on this though. I believe students at all the
> testing centers that are within reasonable timezones of one another
> have the
> same set of OEQs. If only a couple of the students answer the
> question
> correctly, it's counted as valid. If no one answers it correctly,
> then
> those who are very close get credit. Something similar to blowing
> the curve
> or discarding the outliers.
>
> When I was speaking with the proctors at lunch, they both knew one
> of the
> questions I was referring to and I could tell they thought it was
> bogus and
> basically responded with "well, there are 3 others.." I know I was
> 2/3rd of
> the way correct on one question and sort of almost practically
> somewhat
> (scientific terms) correct on the other. I would not have expected
> most
> CCIE candidates to get those two questions correct, one was better
> suited
> for another track.
>
> I would love to share my two, maybe one day when I get permission.
>
> -ryan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of
> Dennis Worth
> Sent: Saturday, September 05, 2009 1:57 PM
> To: <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com> <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
> Subject: OEQ NDA Question?
>
> Group,
> I was thinking that if the questions that Cisco asked in OEQ's are
> not used
> twice. Can't we share that information or least get clarity from other
> engineers on how they would answer, so that we can learn to provide
> the
> right solution next time?
>
> Any thought's on this?
>
> --
> Dennis Worth
>
>
> 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 Sat Sep 05 2009 - 21:35:47 ART

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Oct 04 2009 - 07:42:02 ART