 |
|
 |
|
 |
Emmett Dulaney
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
Incrementing Exam Scores |
| Plus, this week's tech pioneer is blazing new trails in search, and Book of the Week is perfect for "cramming." |
| by Emmett Dulaney |
|
11/14/2007 -- In a previous column, I questioned the idea of "second chance" offers which let you take an exam twice, with the second try being a free retake. The idea here seems to be that it's OK to fail, then study and try again. To give a more accurate picture of a person's knowledge and skill, I suggested that transcripts should include the number of times a person took an exam as well as the score for each attempt.
This generated a fair amount of e-mails and a few posted replies, both agreeing and disagreeing with my analysis. One of the most interesting posts, in my opinion, was from "Joe from Washington, D.C."
Joe's suggestion was that not only should each attempt be recorded, but each attempt should be more difficult:
"How about raising the passing score for subsequent attempts at the same certification? If passing is getting three out of four questions correct on the first try, the second try should require four out of five correct. I also wholeheartedly agree about having the number of certification attempts (along with the dates) available to anyone who wants to verify an individual's certification."
The more I thought about this idea, the more I liked it. When my daughter does horribly on an exam, the teacher allows her to correct her work and get half-credit for each amended answer. She doesn't get full credit, simply because she doesn't deserve to have the same score as the person who got it right the first time around.
What are your thoughts on this proposal? Let me know by posting your comments below.
Technology Pioneer: Scott Jones
Add this name to the list of those who've contributed to technology's evolution: Scott A. Jones. In 1986, Jones started a company called Boston Technology and created what we now call voicemail. Fueled by the success of that company, Jones went on to become a serial entrepreneur, starting numerous other ventures that were often on the cutting-edge of technology.
His newest venture is search engine ChaCha ("cha" translates to "search" in Chinese). ChaCha, still in beta as of this writing, plans to combine a database with live "guides" who can help you find exactly what you're looking for more quickly and efficiently than if you did it alone. While you can choose to do your own search at www.chacha.com, what sets it apart from Google and other similar engines is the ability to hire someone to help you with your research.
More information about Scott Jones and his current endeavors can be found at www.scottajones.com.
Book of the Week: 'MCSA/MCSE 70-291 Exam Cram'
Versions of Windows Server seem to have a way of hanging around for a few years, and Windows Server 2003 is no exception. Even after the long-anticipated replacement for it is released, it's a pretty safe bet that many companies will delay migration and that Windows Server 2003 will be in need of support for some time to come.
Currently, the 70-291 exam is the core requirement for MCSE and MCSA on Windows Server 2003 certifications, as well as for the MCDBA on Microsoft SQL Server certification. MCSA/MCSE 70-291 Exam Cram: Implementing, Managing, and Maintaining a Windows Server 2003 Network Infrastructure, Second Edition by Diana Huggins is a great book for exam preparation. While one could never mistake it for a reference or tutorial, it doesn't fail to address all of the exam's objectives, help you judge your readiness for the test and prepare you to take it.
|
Emmett Dulaney is the author of several books on Linux, Unix and certification. He can be reached at .
|
|
| |
|
More articles by Emmett Dulaney:
|
There are 26  user Comments for “Incrementing Exam Scores”
|
|
Page 1 of 3
|
| 11/14/07: PeteR from WI says: |
I agree the exams should be made increasingly difficult upon each attempt and details of the results made available on transcripts. Performing well on a certification exam is not just a matter of the pass/fail, but should be a representation of the individual's effort in preperation of the exam. A potential employer should be able to review and consider the prospect's "effort" before hiring. An 860 is more impressive on the first attempt than the third attempt. |
| 11/14/07: L.R. from San Jose says: |
This being America--the land of reinvention and redemption--I take issue with the idea that a person who doesn't pass the first time is somehow less worthy. Lots of factors play into when a person passes. The certification isn't really meant to rank folks, but rather to indicate who has passed a certain level of understanding. Folks are always free to promote that they "passed on the first try". I wouldn't be against having this be easy to validate, but let's not be too hard on the guy or gal that learns from his or her past mistakes. |
| 11/14/07: RJ the Great from Orange County,CA says: |
You all are Nazi's. :) Why don't you put their work experience on the cert. that would tell the persons knowledge far better. Few employers’ even check if the employee's cert is legitimate. Just thought I would pipe in a big "Ney!" |
| 11/14/07: AK from TX says: |
The most important thing is experience and secondly their certifications. Besides who ever hires someone only based on certifactions, they might only have excellent study skills (so they can score very high and on the first attempt) but no practical experience and skills. |
| 11/15/07: Gus from So. California says: |
As a manager I suppose I’m becoming confused as to what most people see as the purpose of the exam or certification. If I look at certifications at all (I have been passed enough exams to know the difference between “book learning” and “experience” and what passes for experiance in testing), it is to determine if the person I’m talking to has some demonstrable knowledge of the subject(s) required. Frankly I don’t need egos in the organization (“I passed it the first time. It took you four times…..”) I need team players. |
| 11/15/07: Woody from Florida says: |
Along with posting the number of 'attempts' on a certification, maybe we should also post how many job interviews you went on vs the number of times you were hired (Because an employer would also want to know if others were passing you over and they were getting 'rejected good') I do NOT agree with this concept. Many of th questions are vague and at times the answers areincomplete or wrong. Other times the 'solution' is not one I would use, but is the one they want to test. i.e. the 'best way' to do a bulk creation of AD accounts. If my 'technique works, but is not the one they test on, of course I won't know their syntax. So according to you I should be penalized for not doing things 'their way', but then MY way should not work. Sorry - too many flaws in 'this' plan. |
| 11/19/07: Tom from Pittsburgh says: |
I disagree with doing all the above. In addition to Woody's comments (which I completely agree with), there is the issue of new employees. What is being suggested is that these tests are worthless unless you have experience. I disagree. They are valuable alternative to experience if that is all you can show. That said, I have some issues with the shotgun approach some are taking. For example, if you consistently make it more difficult, what does it matter how many times someone takes it? Moreover, it might be better to take someone who has failed a few times because they can answer both the easier and more difficult issues as evidenced by the test being passed. The other alternative mentioned, to post the number of times you took the test, really is pointless as well. If you score close to passing the first time and ace the test the second time, are you really a lot worse then the person who scored two points higher than you the first time? I think not. Perhaps the best route would be to post the user scores online where a prospective employer can log in and verify a user's test scores, times taken, dates of testing, etc., to get a complete view of what value the testing may have provided the user. In fact, this could be a subscription model for employers and can offset the cost of testing to encourage more test takers if there is real value to it. Personally, I find the tests as good or better guage of knowledge akin to a college degree. It is a sample of the person's qualification and ability to learn. Perhaps even some basic level of knowledge - a baseline of sorts - to start your specific training from. The fact that employers are looking for a silver bullet to ensure quality personnel before hiring is understandalbe, but unrealistic. There is no easy way to determine a person's quality but tests, interviews, and prior job experiences are clues that should all be used together to attempt to determine this. It is possible that some people will get through even using all these tools to vigilently screen applicants, but none of them work alone. |
| 11/19/07: Dave from NY says: |
I've taken 14 Microsoft certification exams in my IT career and passed every one on the first try. Some of them were b!tches too, like the W2K3 upgrade exams, which a large percentage failed on the first try. That said, NO, I don't think the number of tries should be recorded on a transcript, nor do I think the tests should get harder. When I ready these kinds of cockamame ideas I just roll my eyes. GET A LIFE! The cert is a very small part of the overall evaluation of a person. Here's a thought: maybe HR departments should DO THEIR JOBS and talk to the candidates and find out about them instead of reading from a sheet of paper, and never giving a person an interview because of what they read on a transcript. |
| 11/21/07: Dan from Austin says: |
That is a stupid idea. You're comparing things that are dissimilar. Maybe limit the number of tries per year, but to list the number of retakes and to make the passing mark higher with each retest is silly. If that were the case I'd be more interested in the person who passed the third time around or later knowing that he or she studied longer and had to pass at a HIGHER skill level versus the LOWER required skill level of someone who passed the first time around. Things are fine the way that they are. Cert levels have gone way down since the new test have become harder and the Architect cert now exists for those who want to prove their superior expertise. Keep it out of the lower certs. |
| 11/23/07: Terrence from SD says: |
You did not mention the grade your daughter is in but when did students start getting a chance do redo their work and get more points for more credit. It was what ever you got was just that what ever you got. Microsoft just wants to capitalize on having persons certified with its offerings. Besides not all people are good at taking sitdown exams even though they may have the knowledge and experience with the application. What next is after putting the number of attempts on a test, the score in points. Then we will need to start posting our transcripts for whatever degrees we possess and where we finished in the class. |
First Page Next Page Last Page
|
|
|
|
