On Friday 05 September 2008 15:05:11 Anselm Lingnau wrote: > Alan McKinnon wrote: > > Lest anyone thinks I have a poor opinion of the RHCE exam, I don't. As > > exams go, this is an especially good one and Red Hat put a lot of work > > into making sure it is relevant and meaningful. Luckily, false positives > > (people who passed but didn't deserve to) don't appear to happen in my > > experience. > > I guess the false negative rate means that Red Hat wants to make *very* > sure that the Anointed do know their stuff.
Therein lies the problem. The exam does not test to that level, it merely tests if the candidate can do the routine ordinary stuff that's in the course. The problem isn't so much that people are attempting the exam without being ready for it (which does happen to some degree, but I'm excluding them from my observations), it's that the exam methodology is very much an all-or-nothing approach. Note that life itself is not all-other nothing. I hear the rest of your argument too, and can't really counter it. Chances are Red Hat has picked a path that is what they feel is the best compromise for their business model. It's just that I get to see the face of the individual who failed, and it's usually for reasons that have very little impact on test results or marks. [snip] -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com _______________________________________________ lpi-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss
