Microsoft exams harder-what’s everyone’s opinion?

NetworkingStudent

I saw this on Train Signal and I keep thinking that the Microsoft exams are hard enough. I’m studying for the Windows 70-680 exam and it’s no walk in the park. I haven’t taken the exam yet, but I have seen lots of posts were people have failed the exam, so I can’t image why Microsoft exams
need to be harder.

I was wondering what’s everyone else’s view on Microsoft making exams harder? I applaud them for going after brain dumpers.

Microsoft Certification Exams Are Getting Harder

The IT field is constantly changing, so it only makes sense that IT certifications and exams need to change as well. Microsoft certifications in particular have been constantly evolving in accordance to new technology developments, hiring needs and customer feedback.
In recent years many IT professionals have complained that Microsoft exams are not challenging enough, that the certifications don’t prove expertise because anyone is able to obtain them and that Microsoft has simply made their certification process too easy. In response to this, Microsoft Learning has made some significant changes to exams that are coming out in 2012.
In our recent webinar on Getting Started with a Microsoft Certified Career, Erika Cravens and Krista Wall from Microsoft Learning shed some light on how new Microsoft exams are changing. Below is a quick summary, but if you’re interested in learning more take a look at Erika’s presentation and Krista’s involvement in the Q & A that followed or visit Born To Learn.
How Are Microsoft Exams Changing?

Microsoft exams are changing in a number of ways; they are becoming harder, more relevant and more difficult to **** on.
The Microsoft Learning team has redefined the experience level for their certifications, so instead of 6 months of experience for TS level exams, IT professionals are encouraged to have at least 2 years of experience with the product before attempting their exams. The increase is also true for Pro level exams, which now will require 4 years of experience. Experience with the product doesn’t necessarily mean work experience, and it can be obtained in a number of ways. People who don’t work in the IT field can read a book, attend a class or get Microsoft training to help them obtain the experience they need to prepare for an exam.

New Microsoft exams will require a deeper technology knowledge, more familiarity with business context and understanding of more complex environments. The distinction between TS (technology specialist) and Pro (professional level) certification is also growing, with the Pro level certifications requiring 3-4 exams, depending on the technology. Similarly, MCTS certifications may require 2 exams to earn the credential. This will make TS and Pro certifications more difficult to complete and will help close the gap between the Pro and Masters level certifications.

The difficulty of Microsoft exams is increasing across the board. Not only will you need more experience, the exams will be more difficult to complete. Microsoft is introducing new question types to make the exams more challenging. The relevance of the skills being tested is also increasing to ensure that what you’re being tested on are the actual skills you need on the job. In addition to changes to how the exams are being designed and developed, Microsoft is improving the user interface and accessibility of their exams as well as test center standards, monitoring and security of exams and test centers. Which means no more brain **** for Microsoft exams!
In short, Microsoft exams are getting harder, which in turn will make Microsoft certifications more valuable. It’s a win-win for certification holders as well as the integrity of Microsoft certifications.
What Do You Think?
Is Microsoft doing the right thing by making their certifications more difficult to obtain?

Turgon

NetworkingStudent wrote: »

I saw this on Train Signal and I keep thinking that the Microsoft exams are hard enough. I’m studying for the Windows 70-680 exam and it’s no walk in the park. I haven’t taken the exam yet, but I have seen lots of posts were people have failed the exam, so I can’t image why Microsoft exams
need to be harder.

I was wondering what’s everyone else’s view on Microsoft making exams harder? I applaud them for going after brain dumpers.

Microsoft Certification Exams Are Getting Harder

The IT field is constantly changing, so it only makes sense that IT certifications and exams need to change as well. Microsoft certifications in particular have been constantly evolving in accordance to new technology developments, hiring needs and customer feedback.
In recent years many IT professionals have complained that Microsoft exams are not challenging enough, that the certifications don’t prove expertise because anyone is able to obtain them and that Microsoft has simply made their certification process too easy. In response to this, Microsoft Learning has made some significant changes to exams that are coming out in 2012.
In our recent webinar on Getting Started with a Microsoft Certified Career, Erika Cravens and Krista Wall from Microsoft Learning shed some light on how new Microsoft exams are changing. Below is a quick summary, but if you’re interested in learning more take a look at Erika’s presentation and Krista’s involvement in the Q & A that followed or visit Born To Learn.
How Are Microsoft Exams Changing?

Microsoft exams are changing in a number of ways; they are becoming harder, more relevant and more difficult to **** on.
The Microsoft Learning team has redefined the experience level for their certifications, so instead of 6 months of experience for TS level exams, IT professionals are encouraged to have at least 2 years of experience with the product before attempting their exams. The increase is also true for Pro level exams, which now will require 4 years of experience. Experience with the product doesn’t necessarily mean work experience, and it can be obtained in a number of ways. People who don’t work in the IT field can read a book, attend a class or get Microsoft training to help them obtain the experience they need to prepare for an exam.

New Microsoft exams will require a deeper technology knowledge, more familiarity with business context and understanding of more complex environments. The distinction between TS (technology specialist) and Pro (professional level) certification is also growing, with the Pro level certifications requiring 3-4 exams, depending on the technology. Similarly, MCTS certifications may require 2 exams to earn the credential. This will make TS and Pro certifications more difficult to complete and will help close the gap between the Pro and Masters level certifications.

The difficulty of Microsoft exams is increasing across the board. Not only will you need more experience, the exams will be more difficult to complete. Microsoft is introducing new question types to make the exams more challenging. The relevance of the skills being tested is also increasing to ensure that what you’re being tested on are the actual skills you need on the job. In addition to changes to how the exams are being designed and developed, Microsoft is improving the user interface and accessibility of their exams as well as test center standards, monitoring and security of exams and test centers. Which means no more brain **** for Microsoft exams!
In short, Microsoft exams are getting harder, which in turn will make Microsoft certifications more valuable. It’s a win-win for certification holders as well as the integrity of Microsoft certifications.
What Do You Think?
Is Microsoft doing the right thing by making their certifications more difficult to obtain?

I think the exams should certainly be as relevent to real world as possible. Should they necessarily be harder? I dont think so. The exam should attest that the candidate knows the technology well enough to make effective use of it which is really what employers are looking for. Making the exam harder for the sake of it to deter cheaters isn't the answer to that problem as there are more effective methods. Secure the testing and have a wide pool of questions. If the exams become a death defying puzzle to solve it will turn off candidates from attempting syllabus and examinations which means fewer people in the field getting the training they badly need. 1999 was my last MCP exam. Implementing Exchange Server 5.5. A lot of people avoided that one to get the MCSE and it was hard enough. I would say three levels of cerification would be interesting:

1. Technologist - Entry level teaching the candidate the basic operation and characteristics of the product. Foundation awareness of capabilities and general deployments
2. Practitioner - Strong on administrator duties to install and support the product effectively
3. Artisan - Design focused testing on matching requirements to design and deployment in the enterprise. Should be strong on mixed environments and integration.

ConradJ

When I was at school I had a house, dog and new relationship going, so I always found excuses and ran behind the pack when it came to cert-taking.
At the time, the majority of cert-takers found that the 70-643 was one of the easier of the MCITP:EA groups to do.

I just did mine, a year later. It was by the far the most difficult I've had (and I've taken and failed the 680). Referencing my old text book, the cert has grown exponentially since it went to R2.

I don't view it as a problem, I see it as I have achieved, and thus know more, than those who took it earlier who didn't have to research and read and learn and lab as much as I did.

Don't look at it as a difficulty, rather look at it as more learning!

saspro

Most MS exams are fairly easy if you've got enough experience in the subject.
I've never taken longer than an hour to complete any of the exams I've taken. Some of them (70-680 & the MCITP:SA exam in particular) I've done in less than 20 mins.

If you know the subject area they should be fairly easy & will stop braindumpers from devaluing the certs for us honest test takers.

apr911

saspro wrote: »

Most MS exams are fairly easy if you've got enough experience in the subject.
I've never taken longer than an hour to complete any of the exams I've taken. Some of them (70-680 & the MCITP:SA exam in particular) I've done in less than 20 mins.

If you know the subject area they should be fairly easy & will stop braindumpers from devaluing the certs for us honest test takers.

+1

I passed the 70-646 MCITP:SA exam with a score of 1000... Dont think I was at the exam center for more than 30 minutes.

I still dont advocate making the exams harder or adding additional exams to get certified.

The 5 exams it takes to get to the MCITP:EA is already enough in my opinion. The exams already cost enough and there is already a lot of overlap between exams so I feel like adding additional exams and/or making them harder will make the program prohibitively expensive (unless your company is footing the bill) and at some point you have to stop and ask "hey microsoft, theres so much cross over between these exams, dont you think you're milking it a little?"

I rarely believe the "adding to certification program to make it tougher and/or to cover more topics" line especially from Microsoft, usually they're just adding to it to make more $$$. There are very few certs where Ive actually agreed the extra exams were necessary.

Cisco has actually gone the opposite direction, reducing the number of exams needed for CCNP:Security while increasing the thoroughness of the existing exams

IEWANNABE

Imho, making a test harder, doesn't deal with the brain ****. The **** will only follow suit. If the test isn't relavent to the job in which you'll be performing, then what's the point of an exam. Making them harder is also a nice revenue stream. In a free market, you let things shake out. Those who don't know the job will eventually get fired...that is even if they make it pass the technical interview to land the job in the first place. Know matter how hard you make an exam, there is always a way to ****. I imagine that some "Tech" folks probably have some short of short wave or other RF communications device iot communicate with someone outside the classroom. A small transmitter embedded in a watch or pen etc., and a smaller inner-ear piece would easily defeat the hardest test anyone could come up with.

Once discovered (eventually), they may scan for freqs or block the entire spectrum....then the cycle would start over.

At the end of the day, there will always be folks with certain jobs, or who holds certain positions who certainly don't deserve them. That's just real life.

pizzaboy

IEWANNABE wrote: »

Imho, making a test harder, doesn't deal with the brain ****...

+1
Cheaters will always find a way, it might be difficult at first but they will still do it and who knows how many proctors at these testing centers are involved in these **** sites.

spiderjericho

Personally, I think cert exams should be fair, test the taker's understanding of main topics/subjects and probably incorporate simulations. Cisco likes to do trivia pursuit with some of their questions, where it's some arcane topics some times. Their questions can also be trickily worded. While their simulations are dead simple. Microsoft, ugh, likes to put the test taker to sleep with their scenario, essay-long questions. Their tests aren't difficult per say if you studied, but it would be nice if they cut the fat. Instead, they're going to make them more difficult. I don't necessarily agree with it. As some said, it's not really going to dissuade the test dumpers (as I've said over the last few months...everything gets test dumped...even hallowed/revered CCIE labs). It might dissuade the honest folks. And moving to a tiered approach is not bad, except most of their tests revolve around products versus technologies like Juniper or Cisco.

Psoasman

spiderjericho wrote: »

Microsoft, ugh, likes to put the test taker to sleep with their scenario, essay-long questions. Their tests aren't difficult per say if you studied, but it would be nice if they cut the fat. Instead, they're going to make them more difficult. I don't necessarily agree with it. As some said, it's not really going to dissuade the test dumpers (as I've said over the last few months...everything gets test dumped...even hallowed/revered CCIE labs). It might dissuade the honest folks. And moving to a tiered approach is not bad, except most of their tests revolve around products versus technologies like Juniper or Cisco.

I suspect that one of Microsoft ways of dealing with dumpers is to make the questions have lots of extra information, making it harder to memorize 1/2 page of text. I have found that with proper preparation including labbing, reading multiple sources, and using practice test to gauge your knowledge - rather than just memorizing - most tests can be passed without trouble. That being said, some of the exams I've taken recently have have very obscure questions, that probably show up on a single technet page. Finding the "Microsoft" answer among other relevant answers doesn't help, either.

it_consultant

MS is a little Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde with their tests sometimes. I have both passed and failed MS Exchange tests which were both hard as hell. I passed the network infrastructure and application infrastructure tests with perfect scores. I almost failed the Active Directory tests. MS can certainly make tests harder than they are in multiple choice format, but this will only take us so far. MS tests should include Cisco style labs, 2 in each test, failing both means an automatic fail on the whole exam.