"A.R. (Tom) Peters" wrote:
>
> Which brings up the question, how and when do we upgrade the exams and
> what do we do with the old ones?
>
Yes, I agree that considering recertification also raises the issue of
future exam evolution. I don't think that it's controversial to say
that we will have to reengineer our exams from time to time. The
questions, as Tom aptly states are:
1) How do we decide when to revise our exams?
2) What do we do with deprecated exams?
3) When we revise, do we completely rewrite the exams or
merely update the relevant sections?
On the first topic, I don't believe that we should be tying exams
revision to any vendors upgrade cycle. (The exception(s) being the
vendor specific T2 exams... Of course that raises another question of
how often do we revise those exams?) I'd also say that we only revise
on "production" releases, and then only those releases that are really
significant to the daily operations of a cert holder. i.e. A release
that revamps the SMP capabilities, but leaves the API's and user
interfaces unchanged isn't probably a good enough reason to change any
of the low level tests.
What do we do with obsolete exams? I don't see the problem with simply
retiring them and replacing them with the new exams. (A question to
carry over into the recertification discussion would be: do we make old
cert holders retake the new exams?)
With respect to what and how much we revise, I'd say that unless the new
material significantly unbalances the tests, then we use the least
invasive or evolutionary approach and just upgrade rather then rewrite
the tests.
Jared
________________________________________________________________________
This message was sent by the linux-cert-program mailing list. To unsubscribe:
echo unsubscribe | mail -s '' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
