He must be drinking Canadian beer.....
And as I'm Canadian none should get offended by the previous remark... I
hope......
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Allen May [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 4:47 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Semi-RANT: extended exams [7:7871]
What are you on and where can I get some of it? ;)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hartnell, George"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 2:29 PM
Subject: RE: Semi-RANT: extended exams [7:7871]
> It's all due to the latitudinal locations of both Canada and Australia,
both
> former British colonies. Because of these extremes, and the northerly
> location of the British Isles themselves, they use the 20 hour day,
instead
> of the more conventional 24 hour period. Canada, particularly, I have
> heard, is moving toward the 24 hour day with typical reluctance, as it is
a
> perceived movement towards the "Americanization" of that country on the
> United States' northern border. So the stated time difference for those
> test is actually the 'corrected' time for that 20 hour day.
>
>
> (Apologies to that great Canadian TV show, "Twenty-two Minutes in This
> Hour".)
>
> Best, G.
> V.P. OGC
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 9:01 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Semi-RANT: extended exams [7:7871]
>
>
> I'm not even sure if there's a CCIE test center in Australia, but, if
> there is, let's not be too hasty in assuming English, American, or
> Australian.
>
> American candidate to Australian proctor, probably ok: "ping that
row-ter"
>
> English candidate to Australian proctor, "ping that root-er," and the
> candidate immediately makes inappropriate physical contact with the
> person in the apparently appropriate direction.
>
> Vaguely reminded of the Battle of Britain veteran, waving his hands
> and ranting "there were fokkers to the left of me, fokkers to the
> right of me..." and being interrupted with "There weren't any Fokkers
> in the Battle of Britain!"
>
> "What does that have to do with it? These fokkers were Messerschmidts!"
>
> (Wondering if this will get through the filters).
>
>
>
>
> >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 makin
g
> >> > 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
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=8271&t=7871
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
