On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 02:33:17PM -0700, Bryan J. Smith wrote: > Ummm, I thought the Brainbench agreement requires you to > claim you won't use such?
Certainly not in the past they didn't. They explicitly said you could. Perhaps they have changed that since. I haven't taken any of theire tests for many years now. > How do you "cheat" on a "hands on test"? You're more than > allowed to use HOWTOs, docs, etc... on the system, which is > not on the Internet in the exam. Of course, if you're looking > through those, you're not going to finish in the alloted time. I meant you could cheat on the online test. The hands on test you probably can't. The hands on test has the disadvantage of requiring a much more elaborate setup. > I've now sat the RHCE twice. I took the entire period both > times for the second part. Some people finish in half-time. > Don't know how, but they do. But 80% of them do not, including > very experienced people. E.g., the last time I sat, last fall > for the RHEL 5 exam, every single person had been administering > RHEL systems for at least 3 years and knew what they were doing. > > I've also have sat two (2) RHCA exams. I took the entire > period on both of those as well. The EX442 was one session > of four (4) hours, not exactly "happy, happy fun time." ;) > > Huh? Brainbench? Sorry, don't see it. If I can find the answer to a question using the man page in 20 seconds, I think that makes a good indication of my admin skills. Just because I can't remember an obscure option I never use doesn't mean I don't know what I am doing. A paper only test tends to encounter such problems. I wrote the LPIC 101 once at a linux show some years ago. My score reflects a lot more on LPIC than on my skill level as a linux administrator. > Furthermore, you can't cover as many concepts in a 4-6 hour, > hands-on exam like you can in a 2 hour exam like LPI. As > someone who has sat those, I can say, they have their own > pluses and minuses. Hands on is certainly the best. > In fact, that's why companies like Red Hat now have over a > half-dozen level 400 exams, which go into various specialties > beyond the RHCE. But even those exams still have tasks that > take time, and can't cover various scenarios. > > It all depends on the focus as it can be crammed it, with > their various pluses and minuses. Are certifications that specialized actually useful? What are the chances of needing anyone with exactly that specialization and wanting proof of exactly that skillset? > If we're really, really worried about cheating, then maybe > the system is flawed. Candidates should really think what > cheating means. Some people will do anything to get a piece of paper that makes other people think they know stuff. > In any case, it's hard to balance everything without creating > a week-long exam that cost $10,000. ;) Well that would be pretty nuts, but then again some people cheat in university and how much does that cost? Is the $10000 for a training course or is it just for a piece of paper you can show around? A training course is useful. A $10000 piece of paper probably isn't. At least LPIC doesn't charge anything like that. I think the only winner in a market where a certification can cost $10000 is the provider of the certification. Sounds like a profitable business. -- Len Sorensen _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
