|
Home > Archive > alt.certification.mcse > March 2003 > Transcender's - Still Accurate?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Transcender's - Still Accurate?
|
|
| The Deliverator 2003-03-18, 11:24 am |
| Greetings All,
I'm currently an mcse 4.0, and am studying to get my mcse 2000. In
the past I used a combination of exam cram books, transcenders, and
reccomended readings to help prep for the test.
I've found the exam cram for the 70-215 to be close to useless when
compared to how good they used to be. I've since supplemented with
other books.
I've also purchased the Transcender for the 70-215, and am wondering
if something similar has occured.
For those that have taken the 70-215 and used the Transcender exam:
Is the transcender still an accurate representation of what the actual
exam is like?
thanks for any info.
jim
| |
|
| Jim,
Whilst I can't compare the W2K Trancenders to the NT ones, I would say
that the 4 core Trancenders are definately more difficult than the real
exams and provide excellent preparation (albeit at a price). I have also
used the MCSE Readiness Reviews for 210/215/218 and 221 and have found them
to be helpful too. I thought the Trancender for 221 was useful, in terms of
preparing you for the format or the exam, but the case studies were much
simpler than the real thing. Hope this helps.
Regards,
DJKJ
"The Deliverator" <deliverator@the-deliverator.net> wrote in message
news:3e7f3809.0303180855.181a9a3e@posting.google.com...
> Greetings All,
>
> I'm currently an mcse 4.0, and am studying to get my mcse 2000. In
> the past I used a combination of exam cram books, transcenders, and
> reccomended readings to help prep for the test.
>
> I've found the exam cram for the 70-215 to be close to useless when
> compared to how good they used to be. I've since supplemented with
> other books.
>
> I've also purchased the Transcender for the 70-215, and am wondering
> if something similar has occured.
>
> For those that have taken the 70-215 and used the Transcender exam:
> Is the transcender still an accurate representation of what the actual
> exam is like?
>
> thanks for any info.
>
> jim
| |
| The Deliverator 2003-03-19, 10:24 am |
| Greetings,
Thanks for the info. It does help :-) I want to ensure that I am
preparing adequately. With this as my first exam in the 2000 series,
it's very difficult to know ahead of time.
Thanks again,
jim
"DJKJ" <djkj@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:<b57ppd$3u0$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk>...
> Jim,
>
> Whilst I can't compare the W2K Trancenders to the NT ones, I would say
> that the 4 core Trancenders are definately more difficult than the real
> exams and provide excellent preparation (albeit at a price). I have also
> used the MCSE Readiness Reviews for 210/215/218 and 221 and have found them
> to be helpful too. I thought the Trancender for 221 was useful, in terms of
> preparing you for the format or the exam, but the case studies were much
> simpler than the real thing. Hope this helps.
>
> Regards,
> DJKJ
> "The Deliverator" <deliverator@the-deliverator.net> wrote in message
> news:3e7f3809.0303180855.181a9a3e@posting.google.com...
> > Greetings All,
> >
> > I'm currently an mcse 4.0, and am studying to get my mcse 2000. In
> > the past I used a combination of exam cram books, transcenders, and
> > reccomended readings to help prep for the test.
> >
> > I've found the exam cram for the 70-215 to be close to useless when
> > compared to how good they used to be. I've since supplemented with
> > other books.
> >
> > I've also purchased the Transcender for the 70-215, and am wondering
> > if something similar has occured.
> >
> > For those that have taken the 70-215 and used the Transcender exam:
> > Is the transcender still an accurate representation of what the actual
> > exam is like?
> >
> > thanks for any info.
> >
> > jim
|
|
|
|
|