Part 1 of a series I'm writing

Discussion in 'Microsoft Certification' started by CertGuard, Apr 3, 2007.

  1. CertGuard

    CertGuard Guest

    I'm writing a series of articles for Brad Reese and NetworkWorld.com that
    most of you should be interested in. It's titled "The Cheating Industry that
    is devaluing IT Certification" check it out.

    It's currently being promoted on the main Cisco Subnet page of
    NetworkWorld.com
    http://www.networkworld.com/subnets/cisco/

    This is part 1 of the article:
    http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/13341



    --
    CertGuard
    You think you know IT?!?!
    Check out the new 'No Braindump' CertGear:
    http://www.cafepress.com/certguard


    --
    Some useful links:

    Home: http://www.CertGuard.com
    Forums: http://www.CertGuard.com/forums/

    Braindumps: http://www.CertGuard.com/braindumps.asp
    Practice Test Providers: http://www.CertGuard.com/reviews.asp
    Study Materials and Books: http://www.CertGuard.com/store.asp
    Vendor Links and Emails: http://www.CertGuard.com/links.asp
    --
    CertGuard, Apr 3, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. CertGuard

    Kline Sphere Guest

    >I'm writing a series of articles for Brad Reese and NetworkWorld.com that
    >most of you should be interested in. It's titled "The Cheating Industry that
    >is devaluing IT Certification" check it out.
    >
    >It's currently being promoted on the main Cisco Subnet page of
    >NetworkWorld.com
    >http://www.networkworld.com/subnets/cisco/
    >
    >This is part 1 of the article:
    >http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/13341


    the main reason why it is easy for people cheat is down to the format
    of the exams. this is especially so regarding the ms exams, where
    there are no 'written' or lab based exams (which many other vendors
    already do) and no proof of experience in the industry is required.
    until microsoft change the format for these exams, nothing will change
    and ms exams will continue to be considered worthless by all but the
    most stupid of ms partner body shops. if ms wanted to make their certs
    respected, they would have done so a long time ago.

    So, as far as ms goes, you should be pointing the finger at them as
    well, because they are the root of the problem and only they can make
    the changes required to make a real difference.

    Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
    Kline Sphere, Apr 3, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. CertGuard

    CertGuard Guest

    "Kline Sphere" <.@> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >I'm writing a series of articles for Brad Reese and NetworkWorld.com that
    >>most of you should be interested in. It's titled "The Cheating Industry that
    >>is devaluing IT Certification" check it out.
    >>
    >>It's currently being promoted on the main Cisco Subnet page of
    >>NetworkWorld.com
    >>http://www.networkworld.com/subnets/cisco/
    >>
    >>This is part 1 of the article:
    >>http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/13341

    >
    > the main reason why it is easy for people cheat is down to the format
    > of the exams. this is especially so regarding the ms exams, where
    > there are no 'written' or lab based exams (which many other vendors
    > already do) and no proof of experience in the industry is required.
    > until microsoft change the format for these exams, nothing will change
    > and ms exams will continue to be considered worthless by all but the
    > most stupid of ms partner body shops. if ms wanted to make their certs
    > respected, they would have done so a long time ago.
    >
    > So, as far as ms goes, you should be pointing the finger at them as
    > well, because they are the root of the problem and only they can make
    > the changes required to make a real difference.
    >
    > Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3


    We're working on that. One of the goals CertGuard has set to get straightened
    out is Exam Security. That includes all aspects of Exam Security, from the
    Testing Centers to the Vendors. I agree, even M$ needs to be critiqued on this
    issue.

    Chalk, I value your opinion greatly. If we're going to get the word out that
    this needs to be done, I'm asking you to take a couple minutes to respond with
    what you said here, on Brad's blog. There are 100s of 1000s of readers there and
    many are in a position to do something about it.

    Thanks

    --
    CertGuard
    CertGuard, Apr 3, 2007
    #3
  4. CertGuard

    JaR Guest

    CertGuard wrote:
    >
    >
    > "Kline Sphere" <.@> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> >I'm writing a series of articles for Brad Reese and NetworkWorld.com

    >> that
    >>> most of you should be interested in. It's titled "The Cheating
    >>> Industry that
    >>> is devaluing IT Certification" check it out.
    >>>
    >>> It's currently being promoted on the main Cisco Subnet page of
    >>> NetworkWorld.com
    >>> http://www.networkworld.com/subnets/cisco/
    >>>
    >>> This is part 1 of the article:
    >>> http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/13341

    >>
    >> the main reason why it is easy for people cheat is down to the format
    >> of the exams. this is especially so regarding the ms exams, where
    >> there are no 'written' or lab based exams (which many other vendors
    >> already do) and no proof of experience in the industry is required.
    >> until microsoft change the format for these exams, nothing will change
    >> and ms exams will continue to be considered worthless by all but the
    >> most stupid of ms partner body shops. if ms wanted to make their certs
    >> respected, they would have done so a long time ago.
    >>
    >> So, as far as ms goes, you should be pointing the finger at them as
    >> well, because they are the root of the problem and only they can make
    >> the changes required to make a real difference.
    >>
    >> Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3

    >
    > We're working on that. One of the goals CertGuard has set to get
    > straightened out is Exam Security. That includes all aspects of Exam
    > Security, from the Testing Centers to the Vendors. I agree, even M$
    > needs to be critiqued on this issue.
    >
    > Chalk, I value your opinion greatly. If we're going to get the word out
    > that this needs to be done, I'm asking you to take a couple minutes to
    > respond with what you said here, on Brad's blog. There are 100s of 1000s
    > of readers there and many are in a position to do something about it.
    >


    Foo. Microsoft knows what needs to be done. Are you seriously going to
    sit there and tell me that a multi-billion dollar company with some of
    the highest-priced talent involved in their so-called certification
    process can't figure out how to run the damb thing so as to cut down on
    cheats? That they haven't looked at other, more respected certs and seen
    how they do it? That they haven't heard all this before? Jeez. They have
    heard it all right here, ferghodsake, back when they used to at least
    have a presence in here.

    They haven't done anything because it is a marketing program, not a
    certification program. They make money off the process, and they can
    show that there are thousands of "Certified" monkeys all over the world
    to maintain their software for a dime an hour.

    And you really expect that they are going to clean up this money mill?

    Why?

    If the certs meant anything, the cert holders would want more money.
    Microsoft licensing is already expensive, do you expect customers to
    have to cough up top dollar for tech to admin it too? As long as the
    market is flooded with MCPs, they are going to be inexpensive.

    Lets just recognize the program for what it is, kay?

    --
    JaR
    A+ Net+ MCP MCSA Michael Alligood fan.
    Remove hat to reply
    JaR, Apr 3, 2007
    #4
  5. CertGuard

    Egghead Guest

    I believe M$ will do exactly what they are doing now. A new cert path with
    the exact same test format. If they want to fix, they have a lot of chance,
    from NT->2K->2K3, or vs6.0-> .net 1.1 -> .net 2.0/3.0. Anyway, a cert
    without exp is useless.

    cheers,
    RL
    "CertGuard" <CertGuard - The Stronghold for Excellence in IT Certification
    and Exam Security> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    >
    > "Kline Sphere" <.@> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> >I'm writing a series of articles for Brad Reese and NetworkWorld.com
    >> >that
    >>>most of you should be interested in. It's titled "The Cheating Industry
    >>>that
    >>>is devaluing IT Certification" check it out.
    >>>
    >>>It's currently being promoted on the main Cisco Subnet page of
    >>>NetworkWorld.com
    >>>http://www.networkworld.com/subnets/cisco/
    >>>
    >>>This is part 1 of the article:
    >>>http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/13341

    >>
    >> the main reason why it is easy for people cheat is down to the format
    >> of the exams. this is especially so regarding the ms exams, where
    >> there are no 'written' or lab based exams (which many other vendors
    >> already do) and no proof of experience in the industry is required.
    >> until microsoft change the format for these exams, nothing will change
    >> and ms exams will continue to be considered worthless by all but the
    >> most stupid of ms partner body shops. if ms wanted to make their certs
    >> respected, they would have done so a long time ago.
    >>
    >> So, as far as ms goes, you should be pointing the finger at them as
    >> well, because they are the root of the problem and only they can make
    >> the changes required to make a real difference.
    >>
    >> Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3

    >
    > We're working on that. One of the goals CertGuard has set to get
    > straightened out is Exam Security. That includes all aspects of Exam
    > Security, from the Testing Centers to the Vendors. I agree, even M$ needs
    > to be critiqued on this issue.
    >
    > Chalk, I value your opinion greatly. If we're going to get the word out
    > that this needs to be done, I'm asking you to take a couple minutes to
    > respond with what you said here, on Brad's blog. There are 100s of 1000s
    > of readers there and many are in a position to do something about it.
    >
    > Thanks
    >
    > --
    > CertGuard
    >
    >
    Egghead, Apr 3, 2007
    #5
  6. CertGuard

    kpg Guest

    JaR <> wrote in
    news::

    > Foo. Microsoft knows what needs to be done. Are you seriously going to
    > sit there and tell me that a multi-billion dollar company with some of
    > the highest-priced talent involved in their so-called certification
    > process can't figure out how to run the damb thing so as to cut down
    > on cheats? That they haven't looked at other, more respected certs and
    > seen how they do it? That they haven't heard all this before? Jeez.
    > They have heard it all right here, ferghodsake, back when they used to
    > at least have a presence in here.
    >
    > They haven't done anything because it is a marketing program, not a
    > certification program. They make money off the process, and they can
    > show that there are thousands of "Certified" monkeys all over the
    > world to maintain their software for a dime an hour.
    >
    > And you really expect that they are going to clean up this money mill?
    >
    > Why?
    >
    > If the certs meant anything, the cert holders would want more money.
    > Microsoft licensing is already expensive, do you expect customers to
    > have to cough up top dollar for tech to admin it too? As long as the
    > market is flooded with MCPs, they are going to be inexpensive.
    >
    > Lets just recognize the program for what it is, kay?



    That was beautiful man. And right on.

    ....but let CertGaurd "Fight The Good Fight". It's like an insurgency,
    just keep that constant steady pressure on and one day cracks will
    appear, or not, that's not the point. What's right is the point. I
    myself don't have the desire to hit my head against a brick wall, but
    I glad some are that thick headed...um, I mean courageous.

    Right On!

    Fight The Power!
    kpg, Apr 3, 2007
    #6
  7. CertGuard

    Kline Sphere Guest

    >I believe M$ will do exactly what they are doing now. A new cert path with
    >the exact same test format. If they want to fix, they have a lot of chance,
    >from NT->2K->2K3, or vs6.0-> .net 1.1 -> .net 2.0/3.0. Anyway, a cert
    >without exp is useless.


    too true.

    certification is supposed to 'certified' something. ms certs do not
    'certified' a damn thing for the reasons already stated.

    Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
    Kline Sphere, Apr 3, 2007
    #7
  8. CertGuard

    CertGuard Guest

    "JaR" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > CertGuard wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >> "Kline Sphere" <.@> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> >I'm writing a series of articles for Brad Reese and NetworkWorld.com
    >>> that
    >>>> most of you should be interested in. It's titled "The Cheating Industry
    >>>> that
    >>>> is devaluing IT Certification" check it out.
    >>>>
    >>>> It's currently being promoted on the main Cisco Subnet page of
    >>>> NetworkWorld.com
    >>>> http://www.networkworld.com/subnets/cisco/
    >>>>
    >>>> This is part 1 of the article:
    >>>> http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/13341
    >>>
    >>> the main reason why it is easy for people cheat is down to the format
    >>> of the exams. this is especially so regarding the ms exams, where
    >>> there are no 'written' or lab based exams (which many other vendors
    >>> already do) and no proof of experience in the industry is required.
    >>> until microsoft change the format for these exams, nothing will change
    >>> and ms exams will continue to be considered worthless by all but the
    >>> most stupid of ms partner body shops. if ms wanted to make their certs
    >>> respected, they would have done so a long time ago.
    >>>
    >>> So, as far as ms goes, you should be pointing the finger at them as
    >>> well, because they are the root of the problem and only they can make
    >>> the changes required to make a real difference.
    >>>
    >>> Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3

    >>
    >> We're working on that. One of the goals CertGuard has set to get straightened
    >> out is Exam Security. That includes all aspects of Exam Security, from the
    >> Testing Centers to the Vendors. I agree, even M$ needs to be critiqued on
    >> this issue.
    >>
    >> Chalk, I value your opinion greatly. If we're going to get the word out that
    >> this needs to be done, I'm asking you to take a couple minutes to respond
    >> with what you said here, on Brad's blog. There are 100s of 1000s of readers
    >> there and many are in a position to do something about it.
    >>

    >
    > Foo. Microsoft knows what needs to be done. Are you seriously going to sit
    > there and tell me that a multi-billion dollar company with some of the
    > highest-priced talent involved in their so-called certification process can't
    > figure out how to run the damb thing so as to cut down on cheats? That they
    > haven't looked at other, more respected certs and seen how they do it? That
    > they haven't heard all this before? Jeez. They have heard it all right here,
    > ferghodsake, back when they used to at least have a presence in here.
    >

    This article wasn't directly targeted at M$ as much as it was the cheaters that
    have taken advantage of every certification. Ok, there are more cheaters that
    are M$ certified, and yes, it's because of reasons that Kline stated (amongst
    many other reasons), but sitting here complaining to people that have heard it
    all before isn't going to take care of the problem. I know how you feel, I feel
    the same way. Why do you think I've opted to expand? It's time we let other's
    hear our voices. Unless you just like reading your own text. I can tell you
    right now that most of the 'outsiders' read a few posts in here, form an opinion
    of the group as a whole, then never come back.

    > They haven't done anything because it is a marketing program, not a
    > certification program. They make money off the process, and they can show that
    > there are thousands of "Certified" monkeys all over the world to maintain
    > their software for a dime an hour.
    >

    Maybe so, but people are buying into it. If I'm not mistaken, your signature
    says you have too. So, is being a "Certified" monkey all it's cracked up to be?
    Chill...I'm just tryin to get your goat. So what says that we, as professionals
    in the industry, cannot turn that around? If you're so worried about the value
    of your certifications, then why haven't you done anything about it? Or is it
    just something to b!tch about, it's just not worth your time to do anything
    about?

    > And you really expect that they are going to clean up this money mill?
    >

    I've come to NOT expect anything from anyone anymore. It's a worthless waste of
    my time to expect someone else to do something that I can do myself. In this
    case, maybe I can, maybe I can't. If I yell, 'uncle' then you'll know I've given
    up.

    > Why?
    >

    ^^^

    > If the certs meant anything, the cert holders would want more money. Microsoft
    > licensing is already expensive, do you expect customers to have to cough up
    > top dollar for tech to admin it too? As long as the market is flooded with
    > MCPs, they are going to be inexpensive.
    >

    If they want Top Techs, yes, why not? We all know that MCP, in and of itself, is
    virtually meaningless. Only when combined with other MCP exams do the certs
    begin to have meaning. Unfortunately, as you've stated, an overabundance of even
    those certs (MCSE, CCNP, etc.) are killing the value. You can thank the gunmen
    for those, and they are being taken care of (the gunmen and the cheaters).

    > Lets just recognize the program for what it is, kay?
    >

    Instead, why don't we take the opportunity to help shape the program into what
    it should be? What does complaining about it do? I've learnt a lot in the time
    that I've been here, but one thing I've known all along is that b!tching about
    it doesn't work. It doesn't get your voice heard any faster than the people in
    the next newsgroup, in fact, the people that should be listening closed the
    doors long ago.

    > --
    > JaR
    > A+ Net+ MCP MCSA Michael Alligood fan.
    > Remove hat to reply


    --
    CertGuard
    Get the new 'No Braindump' CertGear
    http://www.cafepress.com/certguard
    CertGuard, Apr 3, 2007
    #8
  9. CertGuard

    CertGuard Guest

    "kpg" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns9907731B0FAC9ipostthereforeiam@207.46.248.16...
    >
    >
    > That was beautiful man. And right on.
    >
    > ...but let CertGaurd "Fight The Good Fight". It's like an insurgency,
    > just keep that constant steady pressure on and one day cracks will
    > appear, or not, that's not the point. What's right is the point. I
    > myself don't have the desire to hit my head against a brick wall, but
    > I glad some are that thick headed...um, I mean courageous.
    >
    > Right On!
    >
    > Fight The Power!
    >

    So that's all this is to you guys, huh? I guess I've kinda seen this all along,
    but refused to acknowledge it. Wow, this really opens things up.

    So you do just like reading your own text?! And you are saying that you DON'T
    care about the certs, you just want to b!tch about them losing value. Amazing,
    and to think I bought into *your* program.

    Thanks for all the support, really!


    --
    CertGuard
    Get the new 'No Braindump' CertGear
    http://www.cafepress.com/certguard
    CertGuard, Apr 3, 2007
    #9
  10. CertGuard

    JaR Guest

    CertGuard wrote:
    >>

    > This article wasn't directly targeted at M$ as much as it was the
    > cheaters that have taken advantage of every certification. Ok, there are
    > more cheaters that are M$ certified, and yes, it's because of reasons
    > that Kline stated (amongst many other reasons), but sitting here
    > complaining to people that have heard it all before isn't going to take
    > care of the problem. I know how you feel, I feel the same way. Why do
    > you think I've opted to expand? It's time we let other's hear our
    > voices. Unless you just like reading your own text. I can tell you right
    > now that most of the 'outsiders' read a few posts in here, form an
    > opinion of the group as a whole, then never come back.
    >


    BD, I think it's great that you and Certguard have taken up the
    challenge to try to make a difference with MS Certs. Go for it, dude. We
    need a bulldog to spit in the face of the lusers out there devaluing our
    certs. But you know, man, I look at it this way: if I can discourage one
    fscking luser from going after a cert in the first place, I have done
    the industry a service. We do not need *more* certified lusers. We need
    talented techies that understand the industry and the software. The
    'outsiders' you refer to, I could give a fsck less about.


    > Maybe so, but people are buying into it. If I'm not mistaken, your
    > signature says you have too. So, is being a "Certified" monkey all it's
    > cracked up to be? Chill...I'm just tryin to get your goat. So what says
    > that we, as professionals in the industry, cannot turn that around? If
    > you're so worried about the value of your certifications, then why
    > haven't you done anything about it? Or is it just something to b!tch
    > about, it's just not worth your time to do anything about?
    >


    Yup, I bought into it. Hook, line & sinker. Just get a Microsoft cert or
    three and HR droids will start tossing money at you. Then I start
    applying for jobs and find out that half the clowns working behind the
    service counter at CompUSA are MCSEs! Is it all it's cracked up to be?
    You are joking, right? It was an incredible waste of time and money. I
    will not be taking anymore MS certs on my own. If an employer wants me
    to have more letters after my name he can pay for it.

    Whatwould you like us to do? Write to Microsoft? Done that. Talk with
    their people? We did that too. I am not worried about the value of my
    so-called certs. Don't you get it? I have written them off.

    The only way that we, the professionals, will be able to turn it around
    will be to discourage people from participating in such a fundamentally
    flawed process. Stop people from even thinking about getting certified.

    Yup, we can take on the cheats, gunmen, whatever. But until MS cleans up
    it's testing procedures, y'all are tilting at windmills. Sorry.
    Microsoft could shut down the cheating overnight, if they had any desire
    to. Simply by the steps outlined in this thread. But heck, there's other
    things they could be doing as well.

    They don't want to.

    It's that simple.

    >>

    > I've come to NOT expect anything from anyone anymore. It's a worthless
    > waste of my time to expect someone else to do something that I can do
    > myself. In this case, maybe I can, maybe I can't. If I yell, 'uncle'
    > then you'll know I've given up.
    >


    No, don't give up. Keep tilting at that damb windmill. Fer Ghodsakes,
    you might be right, and I might be wrong. If I'm wrong about Microsoft,
    and they are merely too venal to clean up the cert process, you will
    have done the industry a huge service by convincing them to behave
    responsibly.


    > If they want Top Techs, yes, why not? We all know that MCP, in and of
    > itself, is virtually meaningless. Only when combined with other MCP
    > exams do the certs begin to have meaning. Unfortunately, as you've
    > stated, an overabundance of even those certs (MCSE, CCNP, etc.) are
    > killing the value. You can thank the gunmen for those, and they are
    > being taken care of (the gunmen and the cheaters).
    >


    Overabundance is not 'killing' the value. It has 'killed' the value.
    Period. Remember what MCSE stands for? How many MCSEs do you think there
    are out there that are qualified Systems Engineers? How many MCSAs do
    you think there are that could walk into any company and fill a
    Sysadmin's chair?
    >>

    > Instead, why don't we take the opportunity to help shape the program
    > into what it should be? What does complaining about it do? I've learnt a
    > lot in the time that I've been here, but one thing I've known all along
    > is that b!tching about it doesn't work. It doesn't get your voice heard
    > any faster than the people in the next newsgroup, in fact, the people
    > that should be listening closed the doors long ago.


    Nope, b!tching about it does no good, other than to let off some steam.
    We got sucked in once by Microsofties claiming to want our opinions on
    'shaping the program'. Maybe this time will be different, but I doubt
    it. They know exactly what they are doing, bro. What opportunity are you
    referring to? You're right, they closed the doors long ago.

    That's it. Venting over. We now return y'all to your regularly scheduled
    very important stuff. Please disregard all above. I'm putting the
    soapbox away for another year or so.

    --
    JaR
    MCP, MCP, MCP, MCP, MCSA
    Remove hat to reply
    JaR, Apr 3, 2007
    #10
  11. CertGuard

    CertGuard Guest

    "JaR" <> wrote in message
    news:#...
    > CertGuard wrote:
    >>>

    >> This article wasn't directly targeted at M$ as much as it was the cheaters
    >> that have taken advantage of every certification. Ok, there are more cheaters
    >> that are M$ certified, and yes, it's because of reasons that Kline stated
    >> (amongst many other reasons), but sitting here complaining to people that
    >> have heard it all before isn't going to take care of the problem. I know how
    >> you feel, I feel the same way. Why do you think I've opted to expand? It's
    >> time we let other's hear our voices. Unless you just like reading your own
    >> text. I can tell you right now that most of the 'outsiders' read a few posts
    >> in here, form an opinion of the group as a whole, then never come back.
    >>

    >
    > BD, I think it's great that you and Certguard have taken up the challenge to
    > try to make a difference with MS Certs. Go for it, dude. We need a bulldog to
    > spit in the face of the lusers out there devaluing our certs. But you know,
    > man, I look at it this way: if I can discourage one fscking luser from going
    > after a cert in the first place, I have done the industry a service. We do not
    > need *more* certified lusers. We need talented techies that understand the
    > industry and the software. The 'outsiders' you refer to, I could give a fsck
    > less about.
    >

    And I agree with you 100% JaR (except for that last sentence). I'm not saying
    give up the core values, all I'm saying is that when it comes to dealing with
    the corporations, there is a better way.

    As for the 'outsiders' I was referring to, they're the people you want to
    listen...the execs that run the small, medium, and large businesses in the US
    and UK (ok, other places too). Those are the people that need to be made aware
    of this...as TheITGirl pointed out, "Perhaps if more employers imposed technical
    tests on candidates and checked out their certifications instead of believing
    whatever BS they come out with at interview, the cheaters and incompetents would
    not be able to take jobs off genuinely skilled people, whose certifications were
    come by honestly." Well, they're not here anymore.


    >
    >> Maybe so, but people are buying into it. If I'm not mistaken, your signature
    >> says you have too. So, is being a "Certified" monkey all it's cracked up to
    >> be? Chill...I'm just tryin to get your goat. So what says that we, as
    >> professionals in the industry, cannot turn that around? If you're so worried
    >> about the value of your certifications, then why haven't you done anything
    >> about it? Or is it just something to b!tch about, it's just not worth your
    >> time to do anything about?
    >>

    >
    > Yup, I bought into it. Hook, line & sinker. Just get a Microsoft cert or three
    > and HR droids will start tossing money at you. Then I start applying for jobs
    > and find out that half the clowns working behind the service counter at
    > CompUSA are MCSEs! Is it all it's cracked up to be? You are joking, right? It
    > was an incredible waste of time and money. I will not be taking anymore MS
    > certs on my own. If an employer wants me to have more letters after my name he
    > can pay for it.
    >

    LOL...yes, that whole line was just a chain yank. Hence the "Chill...I'm just
    tryin to get your goat." I understand your frustrations, I've got the same (or
    similar) frustrations myself.


    > Whatwould you like us to do? Write to Microsoft? Done that. Talk with their
    > people? We did that too. I am not worried about the value of my so-called
    > certs. Don't you get it? I have written them off.
    >

    It's not about writing TO them, or talking TO their people. It's about educating
    the people that don't know better. And the way I see it, if you're still posting
    their certs in your sig, you haven't written them off, not completely anyways.


    > The only way that we, the professionals, will be able to turn it around will
    > be to discourage people from participating in such a fundamentally flawed
    > process. Stop people from even thinking about getting certified.
    >
    > Yup, we can take on the cheats, gunmen, whatever. But until MS cleans up it's
    > testing procedures, y'all are tilting at windmills. Sorry. Microsoft could
    > shut down the cheating overnight, if they had any desire to. Simply by the
    > steps outlined in this thread. But heck, there's other things they could be
    > doing as well.
    >
    > They don't want to.
    >
    > It's that simple.
    >

    Is de-flawing the process not an option? Exam Security is the #1 reason behind
    all of the problems that we're talking about. And it's not just M$, the problem
    lies in the testing centers themselves. THEY are the reason TK is so big, THEY
    are the reason there are so many cheaters, it's not just the type of exam
    (although yes, that does play a part in it).

    I really don't think it's that they don't want to, it's just that there are
    better ways to deal with this sort of thing than to just yank the certification
    process out from under the feet of the hundreds of thousands of legitimately
    certified individuals.

    MCSE, I know you're aware, has been considered a legacy certification for a
    couple years now. There's no use in trying to get the MCSE certification process
    changed, but there are new certs that they are working on changing. And from
    what I hear, it's working...we'll see once the results are out.

    >>>

    >> I've come to NOT expect anything from anyone anymore. It's a worthless waste
    >> of my time to expect someone else to do something that I can do myself. In
    >> this case, maybe I can, maybe I can't. If I yell, 'uncle' then you'll know
    >> I've given up.
    >>

    >
    > No, don't give up. Keep tilting at that damb windmill. Fer Ghodsakes, you
    > might be right, and I might be wrong. If I'm wrong about Microsoft, and they
    > are merely too venal to clean up the cert process, you will have done the
    > industry a huge service by convincing them to behave responsibly.
    >

    I'm not giving up, if I were giving up, you'd see a 404 where CertGuard used to
    be. Next time you see me pushing at that windmill...do me a favor and jump in
    and give me a freakin' hand, ferghodsakes. ;-)


    >
    >> If they want Top Techs, yes, why not? We all know that MCP, in and of itself,
    >> is virtually meaningless. Only when combined with other MCP exams do the
    >> certs begin to have meaning. Unfortunately, as you've stated, an
    >> overabundance of even those certs (MCSE, CCNP, etc.) are killing the value.
    >> You can thank the gunmen for those, and they are being taken care of (the
    >> gunmen and the cheaters).
    >>

    >
    > Overabundance is not 'killing' the value. It has 'killed' the value. Period.
    > Remember what MCSE stands for? How many MCSEs do you think there are out there
    > that are qualified Systems Engineers? How many MCSAs do you think there are
    > that could walk into any company and fill a Sysadmin's chair?
    >

    You're right, and I agree. And I realize that MCSEs will be needed for a long
    time to come, but it is a legacy cert and many people won't be pursuing it for
    much longer, so you can expect a drop in those certs coming real soon. You stick
    with the MCSE cert and you'll be fine in a few years, I'm sure you'll have no
    problems finding high paying jobs.

    >>>

    >> Instead, why don't we take the opportunity to help shape the program into
    >> what it should be? What does complaining about it do? I've learnt a lot in
    >> the time that I've been here, but one thing I've known all along is that
    >> b!tching about it doesn't work. It doesn't get your voice heard any faster
    >> than the people in the next newsgroup, in fact, the people that should be
    >> listening closed the doors long ago.

    >
    > Nope, b!tching about it does no good, other than to let off some steam. We got
    > sucked in once by Microsofties claiming to want our opinions on 'shaping the
    > program'. Maybe this time will be different, but I doubt it. They know exactly
    > what they are doing, bro. What opportunity are you referring to? You're right,
    > they closed the doors long ago.
    >

    I hear you, I've don't my fair share of 'letting off steam', I'm just tired of
    letting off steam to people that aren't listening. Tell me...have you listened
    to me more since I quit letting off steam? You're definitely responding more.

    > That's it. Venting over. We now return y'all to your regularly scheduled very
    > important stuff. Please disregard all above. I'm putting the soapbox away for
    > another year or so.
    >

    It has been a while hasn't it?! ;-)

    > --
    > JaR
    > MCP, MCP, MCP, MCP, MCSA
    > Remove hat to reply
    CertGuard, Apr 3, 2007
    #11
  12. CertGuard

    JaR Guest

    CertGuard wrote:
    And the way I see it, if
    > you're still posting their certs in your sig, you haven't written them
    > off, not completely anyways.
    >


    LOL! Look again. The .sigs in this thread are just my routine digs at M.
    Alligood, MCP. When else have you seen me list certs in my .sig?

    >> That's it. Venting over. We now return y'all to your regularly
    >> scheduled very important stuff. Please disregard all above. I'm
    >> putting the soapbox away for another year or so.
    >>

    > It has been a while hasn't it?! ;-)
    >


    Eh, too long maybe.

    --
    JaR
    A+, Net+ MCP, Fan of Michael(MCP) Alligood
    Remove hat to reply
    JaR, Apr 3, 2007
    #12
  13. CertGuard

    Blackmetal Guest

    I believe that technical tests at workplaces are important. At least in my
    case, I have been requested to provide samples of my coding, verifiable
    projects or websites. I work as a developer and it is easy to identify if
    someone has or not experience.
    Blackmetal, Apr 3, 2007
    #13
  14. CertGuard

    CertGuard Guest

    "JaR" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > CertGuard wrote:
    > And the way I see it, if
    >> you're still posting their certs in your sig, you haven't written them off,
    >> not completely anyways.
    >>

    >
    > LOL! Look again. The .sigs in this thread are just my routine digs at M.
    > Alligood, MCP. When else have you seen me list certs in my .sig?
    >

    Understood ;)


    >>> That's it. Venting over. We now return y'all to your regularly scheduled
    >>> very important stuff. Please disregard all above. I'm putting the soapbox
    >>> away for another year or so.
    >>>

    >> It has been a while hasn't it?! ;-)
    >>

    >
    > Eh, too long maybe.
    >

    Shall we start the countdown? Your soapbox can be the mcngp new years.

    > --
    > JaR
    > A+, Net+ MCP, Fan of Michael(MCP) Alligood
    > Remove hat to reply
    CertGuard, Apr 3, 2007
    #14
  15. CertGuard

    CertGuard Guest

    "Blackmetal" <> wrote in message
    news:#...
    >I believe that technical tests at workplaces are important. At least in my
    >case, I have been requested to provide samples of my coding, verifiable
    >projects or websites. I work as a developer and it is easy to identify if
    >someone has or not experience.
    >

    As they should be. That's one point that TheITGirl made. Employers should know
    better. And that's one of the many goals we're trying to accomplish.

    --
    CertGuard
    CertGuard, Apr 3, 2007
    #15
  16. CertGuard

    Egghead Guest

    Do not count on that. Employers are clueless in gerenal.

    A lot of software shops have their own entry exams, or they need your
    portfolio.

    cheers,
    RL
    "CertGuard" <CertGuard - The Stronghold for Excellence in IT Certification
    and Exam Security> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Blackmetal" <> wrote in message
    > news:#...
    >>I believe that technical tests at workplaces are important. At least in my
    >>case, I have been requested to provide samples of my coding, verifiable
    >>projects or websites. I work as a developer and it is easy to identify if
    >>someone has or not experience.
    >>

    > As they should be. That's one point that TheITGirl made. Employers should
    > know better. And that's one of the many goals we're trying to accomplish.
    >
    > --
    > CertGuard
    Egghead, Apr 3, 2007
    #16
  17. CertGuard

    Zimri Guest

    CertGuard
    > >I'm writing a series of articles for Brad Reese and NetworkWorld.com that
    > >most of you should be interested in. It's titled "The Cheating Industry that
    > >is devaluing IT Certification" check it out.

    ....

    On Apr 3, 7:35 am, Kline Sphere <.@> wrote:
    > the main reason why it is easy for people cheat is down to the format
    > of the exams. this is especially so regarding the ms exams, where
    > there are no 'written' or lab based exams (which many other vendors
    > already do)

    ....

    [I had to trim a few headers]

    Even within that, another Microsoft scandal is that it has such a low
    stock of exam questions that it can, apparently, be subverted by a few
    clowns on the 'web. In essence, Microsoft's exam syllabus creates the
    demand for cheating, on those topics which the cheaters have no
    intention of using in their career; Microsoft's exam format and stock
    creates the supply.

    If the collegiate system did what Microsoft does, there'd be a lot
    more CS majors...

    If Microsoft insists on grinding out multi-choice exams then it needs
    to find ways of churning out more ways of testing the same functional
    knowledge. It has been over a decade since MS introduced the exam
    format, and it must be able to automate a system by now.

    Then the test-takers could braindump all they want; but all the
    prospective test-takers would get from it is an understanding of what
    questions look like in general (which format, per question and per
    exam, would vary) and of course they'd get a basic "we are expected to
    know this". That's not cheating; that's just studying. I am, frankly,
    shocked that 6 years after I took the exam, braindumps are still a
    threat to the brand. They need to start holding personnel reviews at
    Redmond, ASAP.

    > ...and no proof of experience in the industry is required.


    I am not concerned with that. That is the what the job interview and
    HR background checks are supposed to ascertain. If they don't have the
    experience then the companies can hire them on for, what, $20/hr as
    interns doing support. Just like they do with kids who are in the
    middle of getting their CS degree.
    Zimri, Apr 3, 2007
    #17
  18. CertGuard

    CertGuard Guest

    "Zimri" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > CertGuard
    >> >I'm writing a series of articles for Brad Reese and NetworkWorld.com
    >> >that
    >> >most of you should be interested in. It's titled "The Cheating Industry
    >> >that
    >> >is devaluing IT Certification" check it out.

    > ...
    >
    > On Apr 3, 7:35 am, Kline Sphere <.@> wrote:
    >> the main reason why it is easy for people cheat is down to the format
    >> of the exams. this is especially so regarding the ms exams, where
    >> there are no 'written' or lab based exams (which many other vendors
    >> already do)

    > ...
    >
    > [I had to trim a few headers]
    >
    > Even within that, another Microsoft scandal is that it has such a low
    > stock of exam questions that it can, apparently, be subverted by a few
    > clowns on the 'web. In essence, Microsoft's exam syllabus creates the
    > demand for cheating, on those topics which the cheaters have no
    > intention of using in their career; Microsoft's exam format and stock
    > creates the supply.
    >

    Again, I'll state that this article was not directed at Microsoft, but at
    the cheaters that take advantage of every certification vendor, and the
    employers that (inadvertently) hire those cheaters.

    I'm not sure what M$ has in their arsenal of Q&A, but it doesn't seem to
    matter, because most of the questions are being released anyways. Again,
    it's not just M$, it's all vendors, CompTIA & Cisco included. I believe it
    to be more than just 'a few clowns on the web', this is something much
    larger than anyone could imagine, and CertGuard intends to expose it for
    what it is. How? Not 100% sure on that, but we'll get there, and it will
    take time. How much time? Again, not sure, could be a year, could be 10. But
    be sure of this, when we do, we'll let you know.

    And yes, I agree with you that their exam format allows people to more
    easily cheat on the exams, just about any T/F or Multiple Choice Q&A will.
    What needs to be done (and this has been brought to their attention) is to
    have a barrage of essay questions. Not easy though.

    > If the collegiate system did what Microsoft does, there'd be a lot
    > more CS majors...
    >

    Believe it or not, 'gunmen' take college exams for people all the time, you
    just don't hear about it because CertGuard hasn't exposed it yet. ;-)

    > If Microsoft insists on grinding out multi-choice exams then it needs
    > to find ways of churning out more ways of testing the same functional
    > knowledge. It has been over a decade since MS introduced the exam
    > format, and it must be able to automate a system by now.
    >

    Have you taken any of their 'new generation' exams? I haven't, so I wouldn't
    know much about them, but I've been told they are more difficult than
    previous generation.

    > Then the test-takers could braindump all they want; but all the
    > prospective test-takers would get from it is an understanding of what
    > questions look like in general (which format, per question and per
    > exam, would vary) and of course they'd get a basic "we are expected to
    > know this". That's not cheating; that's just studying. I am, frankly,
    > shocked that 6 years after I took the exam, braindumps are still a
    > threat to the brand. They need to start holding personnel reviews at
    > Redmond, ASAP.
    >

    Certifications are being revoked as we speak. It's an ongoing process that
    takes time. Personnel reviews are not something that should be done quickly.

    >> ...and no proof of experience in the industry is required.

    >
    > I am not concerned with that. That is the what the job interview and
    > HR background checks are supposed to ascertain. If they don't have the
    > experience then the companies can hire them on for, what, $20/hr as
    > interns doing support. Just like they do with kids who are in the
    > middle of getting their CS degree.
    >

    *IF*

    #1, The interviewer knows what he/she is doing.
    #2, The company has an HR department.

    Not all companies have an HR department, and not all employers know exactly
    what they are looking for when it comes to a systems admin. And you have to
    admit, it's not easy to figure this stuff out when you're not in a position
    to do so on a daily basis.

    I hope I covered everything. Thanks for raising these issues.



    --
    CertGuard
    You think you know IT?!?!
    Check out the new 'No Braindump' CertGear:
    http://www.cafepress.com/certguard




    --
    Some useful links:

    Home: http://www.CertGuard.com
    Forums: http://www.CertGuard.com/forums/

    Braindumps: http://www.CertGuard.com/braindumps.asp
    Practice Test Providers: http://www.CertGuard.com/reviews.asp
    Study Materials and Books: http://www.CertGuard.com/store.asp
    Vendor Links and Emails: http://www.CertGuard.com/links.asp
    --
    CertGuard, Apr 4, 2007
    #18
  19. CertGuard

    Consultant Guest

    please do not refer to or mention the name MCNGP or its members in any of
    your articles on your website or newsletters.


    "CertGuard" <Newsgroups[at]CertGuard[dot]co_> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I'm writing a series of articles for Brad Reese and NetworkWorld.com that
    > most of you should be interested in. It's titled "The Cheating Industry
    > that
    > is devaluing IT Certification" check it out.
    >
    > It's currently being promoted on the main Cisco Subnet page of
    > NetworkWorld.com
    > http://www.networkworld.com/subnets/cisco/
    >
    > This is part 1 of the article:
    > http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/13341
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > CertGuard
    > You think you know IT?!?!
    > Check out the new 'No Braindump' CertGear:
    > http://www.cafepress.com/certguard
    >
    >
    > --
    > Some useful links:
    >
    > Home: http://www.CertGuard.com
    > Forums: http://www.CertGuard.com/forums/
    >
    > Braindumps: http://www.CertGuard.com/braindumps.asp
    > Practice Test Providers: http://www.CertGuard.com/reviews.asp
    > Study Materials and Books: http://www.CertGuard.com/store.asp
    > Vendor Links and Emails: http://www.CertGuard.com/links.asp
    > --
    >
    >
    >
    >
    Consultant, Apr 4, 2007
    #19
  20. CertGuard

    CertGuard Guest

    "Consultant" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > please do not refer to or mention the name MCNGP or its members in any of your
    > articles on your website or newsletters.
    >
    >

    I will not. I've already stated that. Unless of course, someone in the MCNGP
    make a considerable contribution to the IT community that warrants such
    recognition. In which case, it would not only be CertGuard that makes the note,
    but many of the other IT venues out there as well. Between you and me, I don't
    think you'll have anything to worry about.

    --
    CG
    CertGuard, Apr 4, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. CertGuard

    Part 1 of a series I'm writing

    CertGuard, Apr 3, 2007, in forum: MCSD
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    489
    CertGuard
    Apr 3, 2007
  2. CertGuard

    Part 1 of a series I'm writing

    CertGuard, Apr 3, 2007, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    77
    Views:
    1,903
    =?Utf-8?B?QW1pdA==?=
    Jul 6, 2007
  3. CertGuard
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    425
    CertGuard
    Apr 10, 2007
  4. CertGuard
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    466
    CertGuard
    Apr 10, 2007
  5. Robert Williams [CertGuard]

    Part IV of the Series I'm writing

    Robert Williams [CertGuard], May 1, 2007, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    355
    Robert Williams [CertGuard]
    May 1, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page