WOW! I've never thought the RHCE exams I sat through as being 'warm and fuzzy'. The exam was broken into two parts, the morning consisted of a 2.5 hour window to resolve a list of broken issues within the setup and configuration of the machine. Due to the NDA I can't go into the specifics, there was only one item that was considered 'easy'. The afternoon portion of the exam was based upon the bare metal installation of a server meeting specific security and functional requirements, within 3.5 hours.
I am a strong proponent for tests the prove skills through active engagement, rather than memorization and 'brain dumps'. I support the LPI because I believe in the desire for an agnostic certification that covers a generalized exposure and qualification to Linux Systems Administration and Engineering. As another person recently pointed out to me: "If you have a brain tumor, which person do you want? The one who has demonstrated through practical application his ability to remove it or one that read how to in an exam cram/brain dump/study guide?" When it comes to on the job skills, I really don't care much about a person's certifications, so long as the can do the job. When I'm interviewing a person with no provable experience (perhaps an intern or college graduate) I look to any certs they may have. If they have MS or LPI certs, I ask for scenarios that demonstrate application, not just memorization. In the field, it is all about earning money for a job delivered. If I'm charging a rate for a person's skill set, the more proficient that person is, the more profit we both can realize from his/her work. This is what matters in business. Proven skills and their application to making a profit. Daniel Curry Indy’s Computer Geek, LLC http://indyscomputergeek.com (I'm not at all sure whether I have understood the question, but here goes …) The party line is that practical exams (as used by Red Hat or Novell) lack the psychometric theory that is behind LPI's existing multiple-choice exams. Instead, they are based on a warm fuzzy feeling that somebody who can do XYZ on a computer in a more-or-less contrived exam situation will also be able to do XYZ (and, presumably, related things) on a computer in the wild. We don't want to certify people based on warm fuzzy feelings.¹ In addition, one might argue from a pragmatic point of view that practical exams are more difficult to deploy since they need a more elaborate infrastructure than the current LPI exams. This will result in higher exam prices and make the exams less accessible – it is unclear whether practical exams could be offered through Prometric/VUE and at major Linux events (where LPI currently offers paper-based exams), and LPI isn't really in a position to create and maintain its own infrastructure for the practical exams, such that they are available nearly anywhere in the world like the current exams are. The idea of offering optional practical exams *alongside* the existing exams seems interesting at first glance, but conflicts with the basic stipulation that the existing exams already tell us everything one needs to know about a candidate's qualifications. (If that wasn't the case, the current LPI exam process would be flawed, and we obviously can't have that, so there we are.) If we do accept that stipulation, having a separate optional practical exam would be a waste of effort, since it would not signify anything other than that somebody who has passed the practical exam was able to afford the time and money to go through with it. Anselm (not speaking for the LPI nor Linup Front GmbH, of course). 1. If one was feeling snarky one could point out that psychometrics isn't the most exact of sciences, either, but that is neither here nor there. -- Anselm Lingnau ... Linup Front GmbH ... Linux-, Open-Source- & Netz-Schulungen [email protected], +49(0)6151-9067-103, Fax -299, www.linupfront.de Linup Front GmbH, Postfach 100121, 64201 Darmstadt, Germany Sitz: Weiterstadt (AG Darmstadt, HRB7705), Geschäftsführer: Oliver Michel _______________________________________________ lpi-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss _______________________________________________ lpi-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss
