Exam Simulation?



  • [quote author="MarPan" date="1291230141"][quote author="Andre" date="1291193829"]
    Well, actually, at university there were lots of courses where you were able to get practice materials, old exams (complete with the answers and a good working to get there). That was very useful material (...)
    [/quote]

    At which university? Could you publish those materials and/or old exams?[/quote]

    Twente University in Enschede, The Netherlands. I certainly could not publish them; as I don't have anything of that anymore.



  • [quote author="Vladimir" date="1286527466"] .... I said before that a "simulation may not help you", because we believe that you should better spend more time learning Qt, rather than drill through a simulation. Believe or not, this rule is in your benefit too! The value of your certification will be considerably undermined, if it would be known that one can drill for this in a simulation without knowing much of Qt. Do we all really want it?[/quote]

    I agree with Vladimir, this happened with the microsoft certifications way back in 1997-1999, initially lot of demand and value for the certifications, then came the simulations and the brain dump sites which totally undermined the whole thing. I know of guys who cleared the exams just by going thru the dump sites without no prior knowledge or experience on certain certifications ...



  • I don't agree. Examples of exams need not ask the same questions as the exams themselves, just give a good sense of the kind of questions and the level of expertise to expect.



  • [quote author="Andre" date="1291457850"]I don't agree. Examples of exams need not ask the same questions as the exams themselves, just give a good sense of the kind of questions and the level of expertise to expect. [/quote]

    andre, in the brain dumps, folks who attended and cleared the exams would go and contribute their questions with the options and the correct answer .. after a few days the entire db of questions was available and i know people who got > 950 out of 1000, without having worked on the subject :(



  • [quote author="tamhanna" date="1291458386"]As someone who failed multiple Microsoft exams, well, I should have looked at these brain dumps more...[/quote]

    [quote author="tamhanna" date="1291475590"]Chetan - I should have known this some years ago...would have made my life a lot easier...

    :)[/quote]

    yes tamhanna saw ur earlier quote too ... :) but brain dumps will get u a paper certificate, but won't take you far right ?



  • [quote author="tamhanna" date="1291475817"]Was a huge waste of money for me...[/quote]

    I think the biggest waste is time.

    Hence why, if you're certain you know the area well and just want to ensure you don't slip up on a few silly questions (and need to repeat the process again) -- a brain dump is good :)



  • well back in 1998, i was a mcse and a mscd and it got me a job in US, that too without even a tech interview ... these were before the brain dump days ... and profit i did .. u bet ! :)



  • [quote author="chetankjain" date="1291475483"]
    [quote author="Andre" date="1291457850"]I don't agree. Examples of exams need not ask the same questions as the exams themselves, just give a good sense of the kind of questions and the level of expertise to expect. [/quote]

    andre, in the brain dumps, folks who attended and cleared the exams would go and contribute their questions with the options and the correct answer .. after a few days the entire db of questions was available and i know people who got > 950 out of 1000, without having worked on the subject :([/quote]

    But why this dont happen at this moment then?
    In other words, people who passed the exam at this moment dont post the questions and answers. So why be affraid for that.

    I also want to check were i stand in knowledge about Qt.
    With an example exam i can check this, just like i did with for example drivers license, math or historie exams.
    Mayby the trolls will reconsider their answer, because i think there will be more people willing to do the exams when they can practice in front. When i take myself as an example, i dont spend money on an exam when im not absolute sure that i make a reasonable chance to pass the exam.



  • I think it doesn't happen because of two reasons:

    You sign a kind of NDA at the beginning of the exam

    There is no centralized place to do it.

    But I do agree that it would be reasonable to have something to indicate the level of the exam. Not the exact questions, but the type of questions you can expect.



  • Type of questions and their level are showed in curriculum I think.



  • I'm preparing for the Essentials exam and I'm absolutely sure that a simulation would be helpful. I don't agree with Denis Kormalev that the level of questions is obvious from Curriculum block.

    Curriculum doesn't show how deeply one should know the topic. For example, what does "Learn how draw on widgets" mean? Is it enough to know that there is QPainter, it provides rich variety of drawing methods, supports affine transformations, different composition modes and so on? Or one should know all the details of working with QPainter, remember the most part of its methods and be able to draw complex things without looking at the documentation.

    The same thing is with "Learn how to use qmake" and "Be able to create and manage a Qt project via *.pro files". Qt Assistant contains an enormous amount of information about how to write Qt project files. What things should one remember about that?

    To my mind all these ambiguities might be avoided by providing an example exam that would help understand the necessary knowledge depth.

    P.S. Of course, I understand the arguments against exam simulation and share the opinion that simulation questions must differ from the exam ones.



  • bq. It covers the fundamental concepts in Qt

    bq. A minimum of 6-12 months experience of regular Qt development including hands-on experience in programming. Training courses are not mandatory not advisable.

    For me, this sound like: Use Qt for half a year, loook through examples and understand them and try out to do some own, doesn't it? The exam will not go down to the raster graphics engine and how to create own engines. But what should they write: Know QPainter but not it's methods? Know all methods? You need fundamental, basic knowledge, you needn't be a dictionary or an encyclopedia. It's the basic examn.



  • I Agree with Gerolf.

    Ok, the documentation is good and complete, as the forum, which is full of answers. But what I really missed was a kind of wiki containing specific contents about what is important for being a good Qt developer.

    What I've done in order to outline this issue? I started my own wiki to gather all information that I think is relevant; to knowing Qt better and to take the exam :)



  • [quote author="fguimaraes" date="1322136774"]I Agree with Gerolf.

    Ok, the documentation is good and complete, as the forum, which is full of answers. But what I really missed was a kind of wiki containing specific contents about what is important for being a good Qt developer.

    What I've done in order to outline this issue? I started my own wiki to gather all information that I think is relevant; to knowing Qt better and to take the exam :)[/quote]
    Can you give us the link to your wiki?



  • Sure, you can see it here: http://felipeguimaraes.cc/wiki/index.php/Qt_Essentials

    Well, I'm just in the begining of it, maybe we could create d group to increase the speed of this task. I've certain that would be very productive for all participants.



  • Why do you develop this wiki outside of Devnet? DevNet has its own wiki page, and I am sure good content would be very welcome there. By developing your own wiki, I think you just add to the fragmentation of resources for Qt. I am not convinced that that is a good idea.



  • [quote author="Andre" date="1322138724"]Why do you develop this wiki outside of Devnet? DevNet has its own wiki page, and I am sure good content would be very welcome there. By developing your own wiki, I think you just add to the fragmentation of resources for Qt. I am not convinced that that is a good idea. [/quote]

    Hello Andre,

    I have no objection to write in devnet's wiki. As you can see I'm new here and I'm just discovering the opportunities. Yes, you're idea is very good, I'll start to collaborate in devnet's wiki. Given your experience, you could help too. What you think? Would be very useful for the community as you said.



  • I am already contributing to the collective knowledge base in other ways, but I cannot at the moment commit to helping you out with creating new wiki pages.

    I wish you a lot of luck with that enterprise though! The community would benenfit from having good wiki pages created on things like this. I just hope you manage to focus enough for the pages to stay managable and findable. Welcome to Devnet!


  • Banned

    This post is deleted!

  • Banned

    This post is deleted!

Log in to reply