are you? You ARE the weakest link. Good-bye. ;-)
Priscilla
At 10:39 AM 6/12/01, ElephantChild wrote:
>On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Kevin Wigle wrote:
>
> > I wasn't aware that an extended exam was anymore different than "normal"
> > exams except you get more time.
> >
> > If this truly is the only difference I'm not sure what your point is. If
> > you, a good English speaker can do the test in 1 hour, then - you're
done.
> > Doesn't matter if the exam has allotted 2 hours or 3 hours, you're done
in
> > 1.
>
>Picture the following aborted recruiter interview:
>
>Me: "I'm a CCNP and CCDP..."
>
>Recruiter: (interrupts me) "You passed the extended exams, not the
>standard ones. You're not a true CCNP and CCDP. You won't do. Good bye."
>
>(OK, this is slightly exaggerated, but it should give you the gist.)
>
> > I don't think too many people from the US/Canada are going to hop a plane
>to
> > get that extra 30 minutes test time. Perhaps someone in Brittain would
>take
> > the train to France? that would probably bump the effective price up a
>bit.
>
>Well, now that you mention it... A Briton would have to hop onto a train
>or plane to Brussels to take the CCIE lab. So would a German, a Greek,
>or a Spaniard. I don't remember anything in the CCIE lab blueprint that
>mentioned granting an extra 2 hours, or half-day, or whatever, to
>candidates who don't speak natively whatever language(s) the lab
>documents are written in and or the lab proctors speak or mangle. That
>sounds inconsistent with the stated goals, esp. when the CCIE written
>*has* the extension.
>
> > I agree with your point #1 and with that a candidate should be able to
>elect
> > to take a non-extended exam. However, a problem could present itself
later
> > if a candidate failed the exam and then complained he didn't understand
the
> > consequences of not taking an extended exam! :-) I don't think that Vue
>or
> > Prometric want to be responsible for having to first judge the English
> > proficiency of a candidate.
>
>Amusingly, at least one Prometric testing center in Paris also offers an
>ESL proficiency exam. But you're right, they shouldn't have to. However,
>there are ways around this, such as letting you (the candidate) take the
>exam again for free, perhaps limiting that to cases where you appear to
>be in good faith and or didn't fail the exam abismally (which could be
>decided by the number of correct answers to questions you had time to
>answer before the ax felt). Also, the policy is cisco's, and my email
>was addressed to cisco.
>
> > Your point #2 probably wasn't thought of in that way because that would
be
> > politcally incorrect and nobody wants that :-)
>
>OK, so I'm blunt and unsubtle. :-) I'm curious, though: what would be a
>newspeak way of stating it without making it meaningless?
>
> > Your point #3 would require in my opinion that the option to accept/deny
>the
> > extended exam would have to be asked in the candidate's native language.
> > Now imagine how interesting that could get...................
>
>I must have a pedestrian imagination, because all solutions to that that
>I could think of are uninteresting.
>
>- If registering online: IMHO, someone who could navigate the test
> center's web pages should be able to understand a warning, or a
> mention, in plain English right at the point the option is offered.
>
>- If registering in person or on the phone: you would presumably speak
> to someone (an administrative assistant or receptionist, perhaps) who
> speaks the same language as you.
>
> > Unless the exam content is easier somehow, I think you're over-reacting a
> > little bit. I would just accept the time and probably never use it (I
> > hope).
>
>And I may well end up doing that myself. Indeed, I did in the past. But
>who said I can't try to change that policy and or get a good rant out of
>it at the same time? 'Sides which, I have to live up to my reputation as
>a loudmouth and a curmudgeon, don't I? :-)
>
> > Kevin Wigle
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "ElephantChild"
> > To:
> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 10:32 AM
> > Subject: Semi-RANT: extended exams [7:7871]
> >
> > > This is a copy of a message I sent to cisco training about hidden
> > > dangers of extended exams. Thoughtful comments and answering rants are
> > > equally welcome. No flames, please.
> >
> > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > > From: ElephantChild
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 13:51:08 +0200 (CEST)
> > > Subject: CSIDS 2.0 beta: can I have the unextended version?
> > >
> > > On June 1st, I registered to take 9E1-572, the CSIDS 2.0 beta. I'm
> > > scheduled to take it on June 14 at a VUE testing center in France. The
> > > confirmation message I received stated that the test time was extended
> > > by 30 minutes to accomodate me as a "non-native English speaker living
> > > in (a) non-English-speaking country", when I didn't request any such
> > > accomodation. That, IMO, carries 3 disturbing assumptions:
> > >
> > > 1- That no native English speaker would live outside an
English-speaking
> > > country.
> > >
> > > 2- That ESL fluency is somehow inferior to native fluency, and not
> > > enough to handle technical material on a subject I should know well
> > > at the same rate as a native speaker would, or at a rate close
enough
> > > not to need extra time.
> > >
> > > 3- That I want the extension at all.
> > >
> > > I raised that issue with VUE, and I was eventually told that I needed
to
> > > get approval from cisco training before VUE, or anyone, would let me
> > > take the unextended version.
> > >
> > > If you follow discussions among cisco certified professionals, you
> > > probably noticed that a recurring theme is the perception that making
> > > any certification too easy lowers the worth of all certifications for
> > > those who hold them, are preparing for them, or are contemplating
> > > passing them.
> > >
> > > Granted, some candidates, maybe most of them, know the subject well
> > > enough, but have trouble with English and need the extra time to
> > > understand the questions and the possible answers. For them, the extra
> > > time may help keep the exam more or less as difficult as the unextended
> > > exam is for a candidate fluent in English. However, for a fluent
English
> > > speaker (whether native or not), that's not needed, and forcing me to
> > > take an extended version when I don't need it is lowering its worth for
> > > all candidates worldwide.
> > >
> > > This strikes me as especially important for a beta exam, as you're
still
> > > trying to set the difficulty and evaluate individual questions for
> > > clarity, accuracy, and relevance. I'm not sure how many worldwide will
> > > be taking that exam, and what share of them got the extended version.
It
> > > seems to me, though, that the less unsure you are how much of the score
> > > comes from domain knowledge and how much from English fluency (or the
> > > lack of either), the better for the released exam.
> > >
> > > I respectfully request that you make extended exams an option,
available
> > > to the candidates who request them, and not force them on candidates
who
> > > neither want nor need them. I also request that you let candidates
> > > registered for the beta who didn't take it already choose which version
> > > they want to take, and inform them quickly if you decide to grant my
> > > request.
> > >
> > > Thanks for listening.
>
>--
>"Someone approached me and asked me to teach a javascript course. I was
>about to decline, saying that my complete ignorance of the subject made
>me unsuitable, then I thought again, that maybe it doesn't, as driving
>people away from it is a desirable outcome." --Me
________________________
Priscilla Oppenheimer
http://www.priscilla.com
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=8250&t=7871
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
