On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 20:22 -0400, G. Matthew Rice wrote: > I couldn't agree more. To a point. However, if an examinee has to look up > the -l optoin to ls or the -z or -c option to tar, that person doesn't have > enough real experience. And that _will_ be reflected in their score. > Agreed, that is very true. If however for example FITB questions about the specific newsgroup on usenet where one can find Linux information do still exist in the tests, I think we do mis reality here. And for example: is it really that important if you don't know that linux documentation is on tldp.org?
(Disclaimer: I have no knowledge of real test questions, if this looks like a real test question, that is a pure coincidence) > That said, LPI tries to avoid testing obscure options to commands. > OK, the people I've proctered the exams for, did have the feeling that LPI missed that point somehow. If ever LPI decides that the current questions would need a reality check, I would volunteer for that. > > > Any alternative that would work? Well, maybe there is. Has anyone of you > > ever taken a Microsoft test? In their more advanced tests, they have > > scenario's and try to measure real world knowledge. For example: let's > > say we want to make a question in which we want to measure knowledge of > > the tar command. You can go two directions: > > > > I know, asking questions in this way makes LPI 1 easier compared to what > > it is now. > > Not necessarily. This is where the psychometrics come in. If it turns out > that writing questions in this manner (and there are numerous ones like this, > especially in LPIC-3 ;)) makes them, overall, easier, it just means that the > exam taker will have to get more questions correct in order to pass. Or we > use more of the hard questions on the exam. > OK, not necessarily. It all depends on the quality of the questions. But since I'm not familiar with the psychometric process, I may mis a point here. > Hmm, perhaps I should start doing a talk on the psychometric process at > conferences. A lot of people probably have no idea what is involved. Agreed. Is it possible to explain it in a few lines? > > Oh, I think that you misunderstood my intent on removing/adding some content > to the LPIC-1 exams. I want to remove some of the 'admin' content and move > it to LPIC-2 and to add more content that is useful for ALL Linux > professionals on the LPIC-1 level. Regardless of a person's main use of > Linux; ubergeek, developer, admin, dba. I think that LPIC-1 should be a > starting point for a number of streams/specialties. Not just an 'admin' > cert. > How do you see this different from the current approach? Could you give an example of one such 'admin'-content question and a more generic content question? (No real examples, just to get the idea) > > > If we *really* want to make LPIC-1 a junior level admin certification, we > > shouldn't ask about options no one ever uses, we should ask about things > > that are used in real life. Small scenario questions are so much more real. > > Sander, if there is a question on the exam that asks about an option that is > rarely used, please send me this information privately and I'll look into it. > Taking my task as a procter rather serious, I haven't seen any of the questions that were on the exam. Sorry, no real answers here. Will send a mail to the group of people that I've proctered though. If they have input, I'll send it directly to you later. > Keep in mind that one person's 'rarely used' may be someone else's 'often > used'. We get that opinion just regularly such as 'why do you both with > Debian package questions? The real world only uses RedHat.' Seriously, we > get that a lot. > That's why I never understood that we kept the idea of a Debian version and a Red Hat version behind. Distribution independent shouldn't be the same as "about all distributions" > > Can you point out the ones that you tried? I have seen some that completely > miss the spirit of what LPI is trying to test. They do go for the esoterica. > I've worked with "ExamSaver" Regards, Sander _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
