"Jeff Quast" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I can't imagine you would expect us to be able to comment on or e-mail you
> regarding any one question in particular, especially where wording and
> ambiguity is involved! I put a great amount of effort into commenting and
> making suggestions during the exam using the 'comment on this question'
> feature. In fact, I nearly exhausted my test time due to the amount of
> commenting I did! I would estimate I commented on well more than half of
> the exam questions I received. Though the test program crashed during
> my last exam, could I expect that these comments were still received?
Thanks, Jeff. Most people don't fill in the comments during the exams and
just e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'll check to see if we did get those comments.
> I am only able to find documentation that only roughly outlines that the
> evaluation of these comments were performed during the beta period.
> I am unable to find any documentation regarding your current process
> for evaluation of exam question comments.
>
> Could you please let us know how the in-exam comments are evaluated,
> by whom, and by what process? Are these printed and evaluated by a
> group, a single person, or stored for optional review? Is there any sort
> of "open, closed" issue-style tracking system regarding these comments?
The bulk of this is described on the LPI public wiki (in the Examdev web):
https://group.lpi.org/publicwiki/bin/view/Examdev/WebHome
Particularly, look under the process descriptions link.
> I'd also like to take this opportunity to express my disagreement with the
> unbalanced number of questions my exam score was evaluated with
> regarding the innd software package. If I recall correctly, I received more
> than twice the number of questions on innd than sendmail under the
> same exam category. A simple survey of monster.com for 'sendmail'
> reveals 205 results, where 'usenet' reveals 5, and innd none. How did
> any psychometric assessment result in innd being included in the exam
> at a greater proportion than sendmail, which is unarguably more
> common in the work field?
Have I got an opportunity for you :)
We're reevaluating the entire LPIC-1/2 set of objectives right now. The
LPIC-1 is mostly complete and waiting for the end of the JTA survey to assign
weightings and final touches.
The LPIC-2 ones are just about to get cleaned up, debated and set for the JTA
survey. Please consider joining the lpi-examdev mailing list and contribute
to the discussion:
http://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
> Is this simply the rare chance of random yet categorized selections from a
> pool of questions resulting in uneven distribution of exam subjects,
> particularly in terms of assessment of software knowledge? Or is unfair
> distribution of uncommon subject matter intentional, as documented in
> FAQ section 2.14, regarding the intentional placement of obscure
> questions for the purpose of retaining a failure rate high enough to
> validate the professionalism of those who pass the exam? Or is it a
> combination of both?
I think that you misread 2.14. The intention of the difficult questions is
not to maintain a failure rate. It is used to correlate answers with other
questions to help determine which questions are good and which ones aren't.
I (and LPI) would love it if everyone passed on their first attempts.
Reality makes that not happen, though.
> Finally (last question!), who were or are the members of the
> psychometric staff vaguely referenced on your online site? I am
> looking for documentation along the lines of this,
> http://www.bsdcertification.org/index.php?NAV=News&Item=pr029
Hmm, you're right. The info should have been here (I'll bug someone about
that):
http://www.lpi.org/en/lpi/english/about_lpi/personnel/staff
Currently, Alan Mead is leading the psychometric processes. He's been
involved with LPI since 1999. He's also currently an Assistant Professor at
the Illinois Institute of Technology.
> Thank you for your time Matthew, I know these questions are a mouthful.
> I patiently await your reply!
No worries. I hope that I answered them adequately. I'm a little rushed for
time due to some travel early tomorrow so let me know if you need more
clarification.
Regards,
--
g. matthew rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> starnix care, toronto, ontario, ca
phone: 647.722.5301 x242 gpg id: EF9AAD20
http://www.starnix.com professional linux services & products
_______________________________________________
lpi-discuss mailing list
lpi-discuss@lpi.org
http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss
