Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computer Certification > MCSE > Failed Exam 070-297

Reply
Thread Tools

Failed Exam 070-297

 
 
Neil
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2005
did you hear "=?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?="
<(E-Mail Removed)> say in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> this exam lacks a valid avenue of certification for
> those of us working full time

<snip>
> If Microsoft wants to make the MCSE 2003 a real certification,
> compared to NT 4.0, then they need to step up to the plate and provide
> resources that should and must take significant number of hours to
> complete.
>


I'm confused. DO you want the exams harder or easier. do you think that you
will be able to find more hours to prep if Microsoft lays out tons of
courses for you? I'm not being funny here, I'm just trying to understand.
I'm all for making the exams harder as that will increase teh value of the
certification, but you have had less than stellar success so far and have
indicated that you might not have enough hours in the day.

Wayne did point you to the prep guide and there is a "Skills being
measured" section. The problem is that "design" is a odd fish and the exams
(since Win2k) have reflected this. Often these exams are about what
information you can glean from the information given. If you work in the
field and do installations for customers you know that the more questions
you ask, the clearer picture of what they really want will emerge. Often
what they want is either impossible, cost prohibative, or the wrong
solution. To quote House "patients lie". So you need to treat based on the
facts, not what the patients are complaining about. You have to dig to find
out what they need vs what they want. "I want to have a single AD Site"
might not be the best idea for a company with 20 locations connected by 56k
modems for example.

This is particularly difficult when you don't get to ask questions of the
customer (as in the exam) so you have to often read between the lines. You
seem a fairly literate guy, so telling you to read carefully is something I
don't think you need to be told. Unfortunately, the best prep for this
(Design) is real world. It can't be taught (well it can, but usually only
by someone who has suffered through it themsleves).

so then on to other issues. Do some books get too basic? yup and if they
aren't you get complaints that it's too difficult - please don't assume
that the reader knows whats going on. If you think that there is a book out
there that is custom tailored to you, please let me know what it is? Would
it be nice if MS told you which questions you got wrong? Sure, and we don't
have braindump problems. Should they bring back the section scores? YES!
that one I will agree with ((E-Mail Removed) and http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)
though I doubt that it will make much of a difference)

As for the MOC being a waste of time and money, you have my condolences.
Usually the reason why these courses are of no use can be blamed on one of
2 things. the Courseware or the Trainer. If you feel the courseware was
inadequate, make SURE you tell MS when filling out the MTM form (that web
page that trainers send you to at the end of the course). Likewise if its
the trainer. MS takes the post course evaluations very seriously now and a
less than stellar trainer is shown the door.

I can assure you, as a trainer, I know that there is no such thing as
perfect courseware or perfect trainers. A good trainer can often make up
for not so great courseware and hopefully this expereince will not sour you
to all MCT delivered courses. We do as a community work very hard to
deliver the course in an effective manner, but I have not taught a course
as if you were going to leave my class and take the exam. Many of my
students have no intention on writing the exams and are there to learn
enough to implement that product/technology.

finally, if certification is your goal, don't give up. Although it is an
expensive method, you are learning things even if you fail an exam (eddison
said something about find 9,999 ways not to make a light bulb or something
like that). If it means anything I failed my first MCP exam twice. That was
about 30 MS exams and about 60 total exams ago. keep at it and good luck on
the next kick at the kitty. (sorry Kat/Catwalker)

--
Neil MCNGP#30

- Do invisible cats drink evaporated milk?
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
molsonexpert
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2005

"Neil" <guess!!!@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9616A2BB84C82neilmcsegmailcom@207.46.248.1 6...
> did you hear "=?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?="
> <(E-Mail Removed)> say in
> news:(E-Mail Removed):
>
> > this exam lacks a valid avenue of certification for
> > those of us working full time

> <snip>
> > If Microsoft wants to make the MCSE 2003 a real certification,
> > compared to NT 4.0, then they need to step up to the plate and provide
> > resources that should and must take significant number of hours to
> > complete.
> >

>
> I'm confused. DO you want the exams harder or easier. do you think that

you
> will be able to find more hours to prep if Microsoft lays out tons of
> courses for you? I'm not being funny here, I'm just trying to understand.
> I'm all for making the exams harder as that will increase teh value of the
> certification, but you have had less than stellar success so far and have
> indicated that you might not have enough hours in the day.
>
> Wayne did point you to the prep guide and there is a "Skills being
> measured" section. The problem is that "design" is a odd fish and the

exams
> (since Win2k) have reflected this. Often these exams are about what
> information you can glean from the information given. If you work in the
> field and do installations for customers you know that the more questions
> you ask, the clearer picture of what they really want will emerge. Often
> what they want is either impossible, cost prohibative, or the wrong
> solution. To quote House "patients lie". So you need to treat based on the
> facts, not what the patients are complaining about. You have to dig to

find
> out what they need vs what they want. "I want to have a single AD Site"
> might not be the best idea for a company with 20 locations connected by

56k
> modems for example.
>
> This is particularly difficult when you don't get to ask questions of the
> customer (as in the exam) so you have to often read between the lines. You
> seem a fairly literate guy, so telling you to read carefully is something

I
> don't think you need to be told. Unfortunately, the best prep for this
> (Design) is real world. It can't be taught (well it can, but usually only
> by someone who has suffered through it themsleves).
>
> so then on to other issues. Do some books get too basic? yup and if they
> aren't you get complaints that it's too difficult - please don't assume
> that the reader knows whats going on. If you think that there is a book

out
> there that is custom tailored to you, please let me know what it is? Would
> it be nice if MS told you which questions you got wrong? Sure, and we

don't
> have braindump problems. Should they bring back the section scores? YES!
> that one I will agree with ((E-Mail Removed) and (E-Mail Removed)
> though I doubt that it will make much of a difference)
>
> As for the MOC being a waste of time and money, you have my condolences.
> Usually the reason why these courses are of no use can be blamed on one of
> 2 things. the Courseware or the Trainer. If you feel the courseware was
> inadequate, make SURE you tell MS when filling out the MTM form (that web
> page that trainers send you to at the end of the course). Likewise if its
> the trainer. MS takes the post course evaluations very seriously now and a
> less than stellar trainer is shown the door.
>
> I can assure you, as a trainer, I know that there is no such thing as
> perfect courseware or perfect trainers. A good trainer can often make up
> for not so great courseware and hopefully this expereince will not sour

you
> to all MCT delivered courses. We do as a community work very hard to
> deliver the course in an effective manner, but I have not taught a course
> as if you were going to leave my class and take the exam. Many of my
> students have no intention on writing the exams and are there to learn
> enough to implement that product/technology.
>
> finally, if certification is your goal, don't give up. Although it is an
> expensive method, you are learning things even if you fail an exam

(eddison
> said something about find 9,999 ways not to make a light bulb or something
> like that). If it means anything I failed my first MCP exam twice. That

was
> about 30 MS exams and about 60 total exams ago. keep at it and good luck

on
> the next kick at the kitty. (sorry Kat/Catwalker)
>
> --
> Neil MCNGP#30
>
> - Do invisible cats drink evaporated milk?


You got my vote for rant of the month. Take a bow, and a deep breath, and
not necessarily in that order.

steve.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Neil
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2005
did you hear "molsonexpert" <(E-Mail Removed)> say in news:ub$3c7nJFHA.3484
@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl:

> You got my vote for rant of the month.


didn't mean to rant at all. But I did have WAAAAAAAY too much to say...


--
Neil MCNGP#30

- When in trouble, delegate.
 
Reply With Quote
 
catwalker63
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2005
"=?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=" <(E-Mail Removed)> prattled
ceaslessly in news:(E-Mail Removed):
> My issue, and bad mood, when I posted is that I think Microsoft's idea
> of preparing for this exam lacks a valid avenue of certification for
> those of us working full time and without the financial resources for
> boot camp (which in my eyes I'm suspicious of as a form of cheating as
> well, just very expensive)
>

<snip>

We're not denying that there are some shortcomings in the exam prep and
testing process. You can, with a little imagination, come up with some
labs of your own to test what is being presented and this is a mark of a
good IT Professional. I don't think it's practical to expect one
resource to have everything though. I use more than one resource because
one author will do better explaining one concept and not so good on
another -- the nature of being human. I also think the way they present
the information in the training kits is important -- if you don't have
the facts, the rules, the guidelines for DNS, WINS, DHCP, etc. down pat,
you will not be able to figure out how to apply them. Keep plugging,
you'll get there.

--
Catwalker
aka Pu$$y Feet
BS, MCP
MCNGP #43
www.mcngp.com
faq.mcngp.com

"Incredible! One of the worst performances of my career and they never
doubted it for a second."
 
Reply With Quote
 
blastingfonda
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2005
cldpeak wrote:
> My issue with this cert is that the industry does not view it with

much
> credibility, thanks to the paper MCSE NT 4.0s - I could probably

become a
> paper MCSE on 2003 as well if I could afford the boot camp or cheat

test
> (though they could be a waste of money for all I know as well). But

now
> we've got tougher MCSE exams for a cert that still has little respect

in the
> industry and is nothing more than an basic requirement HR looks for.


This does bug me a little - to your average recruiter (many whom I've
discovered know about as much about IT as my grandmother does), an MCSE
is an MCSE. The braindumper who aced the MCSE NT 4.0 cert 7 years ago
is regarded in the same light as someone who busts ass going the more
difficult yet more topical / current Windows Server 2003 route. You can
put "MCSE Windows Server 2003" on your resume but no one really cares
as long as you have an MCSE.

Meanwhile, the increases in difficulty between the NT 4.0 track and the
2000 track and the 2000 and 2003 track are enormous.

Microsoft ought to do more to differentiate the certs and reward the
people who are learning the newest technologies with a title that
actually means something as it is the 2003 MCSErs who are going to make
the strongest arguments to our bosses to allocate hefty portions of the
IT budget towards upgrading their NT 4 Servers to 2003 (and yeah,
plenty of companies out there are still on NT 4...)

 
Reply With Quote
 
Neil
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2005
did you hear catwalker63 <(E-Mail Removed)> say in
news:Xns9616877CEE52Fcatwalker63athotmail@216.196. 97.136:

> You can, with a little imagination, come up with some
> labs of your own to test


Sybex has labs in the books don't they?


--
Neil MCNGP#30

- File not found. Should I fake it? (Y/N)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Chuck
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2005
I totally agree with blastingfonda's comments. The main reason I keep
getting certified is because of the recruiters out there who can't tell a
good candidate appart from the bad without the MCSE certs to go. Don't get
me wrong, this is no guarantee of a good candidate, but it's the recruiters
entry criteria for many roles. Recruiters don't care whether it was NT4.0,
2000 or W2k3 streams of certs. I have worked on some of the largest AD /2003
implementations around and found that the tested material had little
relevance to the real world, so why do we put so much into getting there??

I take piracy very seriously, but the microsoft view on it's test content is
risible when they have been working with SelfTestSoftware and OTHERS! I used
Selftestsoftware for one exam, and it was pretty close to the real deal. So
when Microsoft recommends' them, it's ok, but if it's someone else making a
buck it's cheating.

Thanks for the links Neil - they are very interesting ! However if MS are
serious about this, they can start immediate proceedings against 100's of
providers, they can locate them using a search engine like google! This
situation has a ring of familiarity with the flagrant piracy of Windows 3.11
years ago that ensured MSs' survival for years to come - hear me out on
this, because by "tolerating" people who use TestKing and SeflTest, MS is
ensuring that people are getting certified and that they are making money.
The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.

I don't understand flamers who can't express themselves without swearing at
total strangers on the net, do it to someone in the street if you got the
guts and check out their reaction.

Chuck.


"blastingfonda" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> cldpeak wrote:
>> My issue with this cert is that the industry does not view it with

> much
>> credibility, thanks to the paper MCSE NT 4.0s - I could probably

> become a
>> paper MCSE on 2003 as well if I could afford the boot camp or cheat

> test
>> (though they could be a waste of money for all I know as well). But

> now
>> we've got tougher MCSE exams for a cert that still has little respect

> in the
>> industry and is nothing more than an basic requirement HR looks for.

>
> This does bug me a little - to your average recruiter (many whom I've
> discovered know about as much about IT as my grandmother does), an MCSE
> is an MCSE. The braindumper who aced the MCSE NT 4.0 cert 7 years ago
> is regarded in the same light as someone who busts ass going the more
> difficult yet more topical / current Windows Server 2003 route. You can
> put "MCSE Windows Server 2003" on your resume but no one really cares
> as long as you have an MCSE.
>
> Meanwhile, the increases in difficulty between the NT 4.0 track and the
> 2000 track and the 2000 and 2003 track are enormous.
>
> Microsoft ought to do more to differentiate the certs and reward the
> people who are learning the newest technologies with a title that
> actually means something as it is the 2003 MCSErs who are going to make
> the strongest arguments to our bosses to allocate hefty portions of the
> IT budget towards upgrading their NT 4 Servers to 2003 (and yeah,
> plenty of companies out there are still on NT 4...)
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
catwalker63
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-11-2005
Neil <guess!!!@gmail.com> prattled ceaslessly in
news:Xns9616AB2DDBCFAneilmcsegmailcom@207.46.248.1 6:

> did you hear catwalker63 <(E-Mail Removed)> say in
> news:Xns9616877CEE52Fcatwalker63athotmail@216.196. 97.136:
>
>> You can, with a little imagination, come up with some
>> labs of your own to test

>
> Sybex has labs in the books don't they?
>
>


I think perhaps the OP's complaint is that the labs are too simplistic.

--
Catwalker
aka Pu$$y Feet
BS, MCP
MCNGP #43
www.mcngp.com
faq.mcngp.com

"Incredible! One of the worst performances of my career and they never
doubted it for a second."
 
Reply With Quote
 
=?Utf-8?B?Y2xkcGVhaw==?=
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-12-2005
blastingfonda and Chuck put it better than I can- but I still appreciate
Neil's encouragement.

I'm very frustrated on acheiving an MCSE just for the line entry on a
resume. I would not be complaining about the diffuculty of uncovering the
information and "imagination" required to create my own labs if the cert had
the same respect as the CCIE. But the simple fact is that it does not.

Some years ago, I took a temporary job as a analyst answering the phone on a
help desk- I did it to get by while we moved to a new area and I searched for
a better job. I'm sure you've guessed already, the first requirement was a
certified MCSE. I think that clearly illuminates it's perceived value.

So now as I elevate my cert, I find it extremely frustrating that it will
take considerable more expense and time, for a cert that is still in danger
of being used as resume qualifier for help desk technicians.

However, to take some advice- of course I looked at the concepts being
measured by the exam- I got a warm fuzzy feeling and everything. But that's
not going to tell me that one of the questions will be about exporting Unix
accounts and passwords then importing them with ldifde- but do you remember
if you can encrypt the exported file or not? and if you do, is it because
you did it once?

I suspect that most people, like me will remember something because they
actually had to do it. That's all I'm saying about an effective exam prep.
It must have large complex labs where such a fact is buried in the process of
doing the lab. This way you don't have an "easy" paper MCSE- you have to do
the work.

I don't mind commiting hours and hours to a task to get it right (otherwise
IT is not a good career choice eh?) - but it's the WASTED time of taking an
exam and following an exam prep that did not add anything to my core
knowledge.

Most disturbing is where do I go from here? My original post is about that,
and I think there's not much more short of direct experience admin a large,
mixed OS network and multiple attempts at the exam.

If that's Microsoft's goal- that it's near impossible to pass the MCSE until
you have directly administered a large, mixed OS, AD network for a number of
years. That's fine, just let me know up front so that I don't waste money on
an exam prep and time in a exam I'm not prepared for. Then let's throw some
real marketing behind it so that HR orgs know the MCSE is not for the average
help desk.

Let's also get rid of those boot camps- they cheapen the cert just as much
as a brain dump - once hiring managers find out if you've got the bucks you
can almost buy your cert.

I don't think by idea for a very complex lab exam prep guide is
unreasonable. You would not say- "ah this part in the lab will be tested
on..." You simply build labs that are large, really teach the basics and the
advanced; then draw your pool of questions on the actions the labs perform.

For this exam in particular I realize part of it is to listen to the
interviews and draw your design from them, again this could be simulated in
the lab. Perhaps you draw the wrong design, get further in the lab and
discover it will not work. Now you've really learned something without
having that painful lesson in front of real client, you won't forget it and
it's still difficult to obtain the MCSE.

However, to develop such a great exam prep material is expensive without a
lot of revenue in return and perhaps we don't want to upset those training
partners? Fine, then put those tough labs in the training center- I'll save
my nickels again if I know it will do some good.

Now I've really wasted some time on whining- better go start warming up my
AD lab servers again- at least the hardware is cheaper these days, so it's
probably a wash.
 
Reply With Quote
 
catwalker63
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-12-2005
Is this your first exam? Do the design exam last!! Start with Server or
Professional!!

--
Catwalker
aka Pu$$y Feet
BS, MCP
MCNGP #43
www.mcngp.com
faq.mcngp.com

"Incredible! One of the worst performances of my career and they never
doubted it for a second."
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
microsoft.public.certification, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsa, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcad, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsd loyola MCSE 4 11-15-2006 02:40 AM
microsoft.public.certification, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsa, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcad, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsd loyola Microsoft Certification 3 11-14-2006 05:18 PM
microsoft.public.certification, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsa, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcad, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsd loyola MCSD 3 11-14-2006 05:18 PM
microsoft.public.certification, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsa, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcad, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsd loyola MCAD 3 11-14-2006 05:18 PM
microsoft.public.certification, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsa, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcad, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsd realexxams@yahoo.com Microsoft Certification 0 05-10-2006 02:35 PM



Advertisments