Randy..(MOderator)
I have an idea to do a short poll on.
Do you think adaptive A+ is truly equal
to non-adaptive.
Where people would post yes or no and maybe a
few sentences on why.
or why not.
only A+ would vote.
If this is against policy or an annoyance
feel free to delete this..

Report this post to a moderator

IMO, the adaptive format works. It just seems easy to you because you know the material well. Out of ?600+? questions they can possibly ask you, how would you know what 20/30 questions you will be asked prior to walking into the testing room? Now, since you have no idea what the odds are of you getting a question in your area of expertise or one in your weak spot, chances are you are going to study your booty off on the weak stuff before you even attempt to test.

I know plenty of people who have failed the adaptive test and not to be mean but, they deserved to - they didn't know the material. People I know who have passed it (including myself) knew, and knew it well - they were prepared for almost any question that could possibly be thrown at them.

I guess it just depends on how you look at it.

[This message has been edited by fry (edited 08-25-2000).]

Report this post to a moderator

Fry i see your point.
and understand it but i get this annoying vision of some guy going in the room and passing it when they never even opened a case
and I know service tech's do not work on monitors usually but if some guy has no idea
that a monitor is a capacitor and well gets
killed.Or whatever.Or quits his full time job for tech support only to show he can't cut it and gets booted.JUst nerves i guess

oh Hows san diego I was born there in 1966
I'd love to see it again Someday

Report this post to a moderator

Adaptive or old format... either one could be passed with someone who has no experience in computers. Each one only requires knowledge of certain facts that can be learned from books and braindumps. Some certs like Novell's and Cisco's actually have lab tests where you have to fix a computer or a network that testers have intentionally screwed up. Now THAT's how to test real knowledge.

On the other hand, I had at least 2 questions on either test that had nothing to do with anything in my study materials. I got them right only because they related to real-life experiences I have had with computers. So, in that way the test does itself justice. I guess you can say that the test forces someone with experience to fill in the gaps of knowledge he has, while someone without experience has to study INSANELY to pass.

Report this post to a moderator

Stubby, I see your point too. However, that could also happen with the old format too... A person could very well just study hard and pass the old format just as easily as the new and still have no real life experience.

At the school I go to, however, you are required to strip a PC down to the power supply and put it back together 6 times, install an OS and know how to configure settings, etc before you can take the test.

[This message has been edited by fry (edited 08-25-2000).]

Report this post to a moderator

Well, I think adaptive exams are harder, and therefore they will probably be worth more. But hands-on experience is worth more than certifications. No exam can really take the place of real-world experience, but adaptives require you to know the material better and that can't be a bad way to sell yourself to prospective employers. Despite the cons, the adaptive format does seem to work -- at least thats my take on the subject. Anyone else?

Report this post to a moderator

adaptivecrunchmunch

Report this post to a moderator