Kara, Can you give us a link to the current survey?
Thanks, Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 10:17 AM Subject: Re: Level 1: Issue 2: Memory (fwd) > > We can't preset a "time limit" on what will be covered. We can, however > preset a time to re-survey our audience and see what is still (and what > new) is relevant at this level. I believe (and I'm sure Tom or Alan will > correct me if I'm wrong) but every 18 months we plan to reevaluate our > levels and update our content. This will include a new JAS survey to > determine if our current tasks are indeed still current and if any new > tasks have become relevant. > > While it may seem obvious for LPI to simply say 'LPI will not cover topics > current X years ago', it isn't part of the psychometric development > method. LPI cannot determine what is covered (and scored) on the exams. > The community of active and experienced admins (or whoever the exam in > question is targeted toward) determines what is actually important in > their job. > > It is my guess, that with the next survey (likely in mid or late 2002) > will ask if legacy systems are still a part of the jr sysadmin job. If > determined they aren't, objectives and items related to the legacy system > will be updated or removed. > > Hope that clarifies (or muddles) things enough for you :) > > -Kara > > On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Michael Jang wrote: > > > Dear Kara, > > > > Is there an agreed time limit on LPI coverage of legacy systems? What will > > be in use and be seen by a jr sysadmin in mid-2002 (after this exam comes > > out)? I'm suggesting that a system or even a legacy app designed to the > > 2.0.x kernel (and perhaps the older 2.2.x kernels) will be far less common - > > and generally the province of more senior admins. > > > > Thanks, > > Michael > > > > > I beleive you are correct. But, should jr admins be prepared to deal with > > > "legacy" systems which may have these limitations still? If so, > > > understanding these concepts is still relevant and should still be > > > included. An example may be a system in a factory with an internally > > > proprietary program running. The internal program may have been written > > > specific to kernel 2.0 or maybe 2.2. The Jr admin was sent out to upgrade > > > memory on the (hopefully standalone for security purposes) machine, but it > > > only is seeing 64 of the 128 installed... > > > > > > > Kara Pritchard Phone: 618-398-7360 > Director of Exam Development http://www.lpi.org/ > -- > > > -- > This message was sent from the lpi-examdev mailing list. > Send `unsubscribe lpi-examdev' in the subject to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > to leave the list. -- This message was sent from the lpi-examdev mailing list. Send `unsubscribe lpi-examdev' in the subject to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to leave the list.
