Paper certs, or Paper degrees; Which is worse

Just elaborate, what you think is worse. Is it worse for someone to bombard their selves in test engines / brain ****, to get a cert? OR Is it worse for an Instructor to give students the actual test questions for a chapter exam in a well known curriculum?

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

ilcram19

dude if you dont undestand what you studying for cert or degree it doesnt matter..u r not going to learn anything. both are the same if you r not learning

sugestion read a couple of good books if you are studying for a cert..
and if you are taking a class pay attention to the instructor

all depends on the attitude of the person...that why not everybody graduates or become CCIE

itwannabe007

ilcram19 wrote:

dude if you dont undestand what you studying for cert or degree it doesnt matter..u r not going to learn anything. both are the same if you r not learning

sugestion read a couple of good books if you are studying for a cert..
and if you are taking a class pay attention to the instructor

all depends on the attitude of the person...that why not everybody graduates or become CCIE

Hey dude you didn’t get my point, judging from your user name your 19 and judging from your avatar your drunk and puking!

Netstudent

Well, think about the difference in costs financially. $125 for a paper cert or $1375 for a "paper" class. Plus if a school is misrepresenting thier curriculum thats thier bad, if you misrepresent yourself, thats your bad.

itwannabe007

Netstudent wrote:

Well, think about the difference in costs financially. $125 for a paper cert or $1375 for a "paper" class. Plus if a school is misrepresenting thier curriculum thats thier bad, if you misrepresent yourself, thats your bad.

But what about instructors for the Cisco Net Acad students. How do you or anyone else feel about an instructor giving a student the answers to the quizzes? It's not right! I just want to find out what the instructors are supposed to do, and if these study guides that resemble the actual chapter tests are within Cisco guide lines. Or did you ever think about the fact that the instructor has to have a certain percentage of students pass their class or they loose there job for poor performance?

szkizzer

Ok this is really getting on my nerves. Can you name one paper CCNA, that you interact with?

Everybody going on and on about paper ccna and this and that. Truth is, you either know the stuff or you dont. If someone passes by even reading ****, books, memorizing questions, I would give them just as much credit as me working my rear end at night working with my cisco lab.

You can't pass the test without knowing the material, and if you pass means you have a understanding of the material cisco is testing you for. The **** aren't stationary. Cisco like everyone knows there are elements that will always try to ****, so they keep adding questions, and never let something coming form Cisco get a bad rep. And ****, the questions that you see on ****, will hardly ever show up on your test. So it doesnt matter if you memorize a ****.

Truth is: when you are taking the test, there is no ****, cheats or whatever. Its you, your brain, and the computer. The computer doesnt have sympathy, it only gives you points for getting it right. And if you dont get it right - means you get it wrong, and if you get enough wrong, you fail. Now how can someone ****, if you need a understanding of the material to pass in the first place. You cant pass the test, without knowing what a RIP is what its suppose to do. You cant pass the test without knowing how to set up frame relay. You cant pass the test without understanding the basics of wireless. So how can you have the right to call someone a paper CCNA.

Some people here might, call someone who isnt fortunate to have a router to practice with, but manages to pass the test a Paper CCNA. Now that is just wrong. Its entry level work man. Ok, if an employer doesnt hire him - thats his problem, but no one is forcing him to hire a person with CCNA.

Man this kind of stuff gets many thoughts rushing in my head and since I didnt organize them, i might have forgotten to put something here. Ill try again later, after reading what other people have to say. But something that wont change my opinion is calling someone a Paper CCNA because :

- They are in a tight spot and cant manage to come up with equipment. You can learn how to assemble cables for Cisco routers in a day. SO thats no big deal.

- They have no prior "work" experience, for say. Its entry level (ASSOCIATE) so no one is expecting to have you as Cisco Router master. Doing stuff on IOS is the relatively easy part, understanding the material is no joke.

I'll be waiting for other people's thoughts. Oh and if it matters, I consider Paper CCNA's those who pay others to take the test for them. Or outright **** while taking the test.

mikej412

Netstudent wrote:

if a school is misrepresenting thier curriculum thats thier bad, if you misrepresent yourself, thats your bad.

That's about right.

If an instructor teaches you from a ****, then they should be reported to Cisco.

If you knowingly use a **** to **** to pass the exam -- then you don't deserve the Certification and we don't want you here at TechExams. There is no excuse for cheating.

ilcram19 wrote:

dude if you dont undestand what you studying for cert or degree it doesnt matter..u r not going to learn anything. both are the same if you r not learning

This is also accurate. We "wouldn't hold it against you" if your instructor is teaching from a **** (or giving you the answer to the chapter quizzes) but you're not learning as much as you should be. Getting the module answers in the Academy courses from your instructor won't help you pass the CCNA exam.

If you're just starting CCNA 1, you might want to talk to the department head (if its a community college) and see if your instructor's behavior is his own, or if its due to department pressure to "increase the pass rate." You'd probably be better off dropping the course and getting your money back and doing self-study.

If this a for-profit training company (and you've paid thousands of dollars) -- demand your money back and threaten to report them to Cisco (and then do it after you get your money back).

itwannabe007 wrote:

Hey dude you didn’t get my point, judging from your user name your 19 and judging from your avatar your drunk and puking!

Hum..... based on your response here -- are you sure you're not misinterpreting an instructor review that should highlight the important points of a module for the questions and answers?

If you're being fed the answers -- you're not learning anything. If you ****, you're not learning anything. Either way is a waste of time. That was ilcram19 point.

szkizzer wrote:

Now how can someone ****

Usually by having copies of the questions and/or answers before an exam.

You might want to reread the original subject line and post -- the "paper cert" seems to be referring to people who **** to get certifications, rather than people who don't have access to a hardware lab (and use Simulations or just memorize configurations from a book).

Someone who has access to hardware for the CCNA does have an easier time learning the material, but using a good Simulator will also work for getting the CCNA. And I'm sure there are people who have just memorized the configurations and still managed to do the SIMs on the CCNA exam.

This was from a "jobless MCSE" thread -- I'd say the CCNA in this quote was paper.

Slowhand wrote:

I sat in with my college professor when the school was hiring for lab assistants and some extra staff for the IT department. I had a couple of MCSE's who didn't know what an MMC was, a CCNA that asked "which one's the router?" when he was asked to plug a cable into a router so he could show us that he was able to configure it. There were tons of people who were A+ certified that didn't know a CPU from their own butts. . .

sprkymrk

szkizzer wrote:

Everybody going on and on about paper ccna and this and that. Truth is, you either know the stuff or you dont. If someone passes by even reading ****, books, memorizing questions, I would give them just as much credit as me working my rear end at night working with my cisco lab.

The term "paper cert" actually comes from someone knowing the material, but not having ever worked on the actual equipment. Being a paper-cert doesn't mean someone cheated, it means they know the stuff on paper but not by hands-on experience.

szkizzer wrote:

You can't pass the test without knowing the material, and if you pass means you have a understanding of the material cisco is testing you for. The **** aren't stationary. Cisco like everyone knows there are elements that will always try to ****, so they keep adding questions, and never let something coming form Cisco get a bad rep. And ****, the questions that you see on ****, will hardly ever show up on your test. So it doesnt matter if you memorize a ****.

Truth is: when you are taking the test, there is no ****, cheats or whatever.

Sorry to rain on your parade, but it is possible to **** the CCNA.

szkizzer wrote:

You cant pass the test, without knowing what a RIP is what its suppose to do. You cant pass the test without knowing how to set up frame relay. You cant pass the test without understanding the basics of wireless. So how can you have the right to call someone a paper CCNA.

Two points here:
1. You can know the question before hand by reading it in a **** and know the answer without knowing the how or why. It's not a matter of memorizing 200 dumped questions either, it's quickly recognizing a question by reading the first few words and then skimming to the correct answer. That's why **** are so popular, because it's 10 times easier than studying and practicing.

2. Again you are incorrectly equating "paper certs" with cheating. They are actually two different things. All cheaters certainly ARE paper certs, but not all paper certs are cheaters.

szkizzer wrote:

Some people here might, call someone who isnt fortunate to have a router to practice with, but manages to pass the test a Paper CCNA. Now that is just wrong.

Nope, it is correct. You need to rethink the term itself.

szkizzer wrote:

Its entry level work man.

No, it's an associate level Cisco cert. Some might require it for entry level work, but according to the Cisco site itself the CCNA is able to perform the following functions:

Cisco.com wrote:

CCNA Certification

The Cisco CCNA network associate certification validates the ability to install, configure, operate, and troubleshoot medium-size routed and switched networks, including implementation and verification of connections to remote sites in a WAN.

szkizzer wrote:

Oh and if it matters, I consider Paper CCNA's those who pay others to take the test for them. Or outright **** while taking the test.

Those are called cheaters, and yes they too are paper certs. But again, not all paper certs are cheaters.

empc4000xl

I have come across some paper certs working with contractors in the military. We had one woman who had a BS degree in some engineering or computer SCI. She also had a MCSE. She was supposed to come in behind other contractors and check to see the reliability of networks. She was horrible at it. So after a run different run ins with her she was fired and replaced by another women with no degree and no MCSE, just 12 years exp in the military, now we have no problems. I think bottom line your only gonna go as far as your drive. I think there are a bunch of paper certs running around. The problem is that they were told by upper management to get them. They were already good at the job, so they just had to do what they had to do to keep the bosses happy, also there are also others who are "huslters" who will **** the cert show up at the job and learn it so quickly that nobody will question them becuase they have so much motovation and willingness to learn that you wanna keep them.

mikearama

Rather than quote sprky's entire reply, I'd just like to say... Damn, well said!

I agree that there should be a distinction between "paper" and "cheaters". Having said that, there isn't. When discussing paper MCSE's, it's assumed (by any and all I've ever spoken to, myself included) that they dumped their way through their exams... read, cheated.

Now, in regards to the CCNA, is it possible to read every **** out there and still manage to get through two sims and a testlet? or to read a ciscopress book and get through the exam? all without touching a device / sim? If you say so.... I'm skeptical. So, I think it's still safe to associate "paper" with dumping (read, cheating).

That it, until we come up with a description for cheaters other than "paper".

ilcram19

lol im 22 thank you, i dont have anything else to said other than good luck

networker050184

I also agree with sprkymrk. Paper certs can pass the test but can't or at least never have implemented the technologies in a real enviroment. This is why I believe experience is very important BEFORE certs. Unfortunatley a lot of individuals see it as a fast track to a big pay check. We all know this isn't true. Certifications are to certify you are compitant in the areas specified on the exam. The Cisco states for CCNA you should be able to install, configure, operate and troubleshoot, doesn't sound like something you can be certified in without ever doing it. A lot of people even go farther and get their CCNP before getting experience. I think this totally defeats the purpose of the certification. How can you be certified in something you have never done??? I know I'm not going to change anyones mind about getting the experience first. I know a lot of jobs require a CCNA and one to two years of experience for even the lowest networking jobs. This should tell you that maybe networking isn't an entry level field. I would't want someone without experience touching my network no matter what certification they had. Some times you have to start at the bottom (help desk, call center, field technican) and get exposure and work you way into the networking field. No cert is garuntee to a job..... Well I'm rambling and off subject so I'll end it here!!

seuss_ssues

szkizzer wrote:

Ok this is really getting on my nerves. Can you name one paper CCNA, that you interact with?

Everybody going on and on about paper ccna and this and that. Truth is, you either know the stuff or you dont. If someone passes by even reading ****, books, memorizing questions, I would give them just as much credit as me working my rear end at night working with my cisco lab.

I can probably memorize 1000-2000 questions from the MCAT Medical exam in a weekend. I may not even be able to pronounce alot of the terminology, let alone understand and comprehend it all. But i can definately memorize which answer is correct. Does that mean i should be as respected as someone that does?

iproute

We're seeing a lot of these waste of space topics lately, ain't we?

mikearama

True that!

Tricon7

Having been through the Cisco Networking Academy, I would also add that it's much more beneficial to not have the online quizzes open-book, as you can always dig in the book or online for the answers; rather, if you have to know it, you have to study for it to get the right answers, and this forces you to learn the material. Having had both, I learned much more, even if I didn't get quite the grade as an open book.

dtlokee

I think it is the current state of education, I see it all the time, students who want the cert at any cost, and so they do what they see as being the easy path. I had a student tell me it is my job to help students and that includes providing them with ****. I've taught college classes and you would be amazed how many students think the way to a grade it by sweet talking the professor, or having their parents write a letter to the department head or dean when they don't get the grade they think they deserver. I had a solid "D" student tell me he deserved an "A" be cause he had 100% attendance. People have the perception it's not what you earn, but what you deserve.

The paper cert is here to stay, until Cisco and other test vendors figure out how to prevent it. Part of the move to a single test vendor by Cisco and Microsoft is to help secure the exam.

And to anyone who has achieved their CCNA honestly, there's good news. You could probably score 25-30 on a CCIE lab exam so you're part way there.

A gentleman came into my school the other day to take the CCIE Service Provider written. He finished the exam in 15 minutes (this is not an exaggeration). Keep in mind it's a 100 question test. I asked him if he was currently a CCIE, he said "no". I then asked him what the point was in cheating on the written, as he will only need to study all the material anyway when he takes the lab. He said he wasn't going to take the lab, he did this to re-cert his CCNP, and presumably he dumped those exams too.

iproute

dtlokee wrote:

A gentleman came into my school the other day to take the CCIE Service Provider written. He finished the exam in 15 minutes (this is not an exaggeration). Keep in mind it's a 100 question test. I asked him if he was currently a CCIE, he said "no". I then asked him what the point was in cheating on the written, as he will only need to study all the material anyway when he takes the lab. He said he wasn't going to take the lab, he did this to re-cert his CCNP, and presumably he dumped those exams too.

Wow...

mikej412

iproute wrote:

We're seeing a lot of these waste of space topics lately, ain't we?

I'm only keeping an eye on 2 threads.... if you think there's more send me a PM with the links

szkizzer

man - ok now i feel much better. Sometimes I get a little jumpy i guess. But yea, I really am not gonna pay much attention to this paper cert stuff or whatever it is. It much better to just, study and take what life gives ya -- after you have done everything you can.

but gotta clear something up.

I can probably memorize 1000-2000 questions from the MCAT Medical exam in a weekend. I may not even be able to pronounce alot of the terminology, let alone understand and comprehend it all. But i can definitely memorize which answer is correct. Does that mean i should be as respected as someone that does?

Sorry buddy, thats a negative

But props to you, on having such a butt kick memory.

The term "paper cert" actually comes from someone knowing the material, but not having ever worked on the actual equipment. Being a paper-cert doesn't mean someone cheated, it means they know the stuff on paper but not by hands-on experience.

So, am I a paper Cert then? I work night and day on my lab. and I certainly don't **** (don't see point). And I have prior networking experience, just not actual work, as in, "no pay".
Actually I know a lot about networking (excluding what I have learned form my CCNA self-Study). And the communication skills and all that Ive got it covered, afterall my "communication" does include talking in three language on a daily basis. hehe

:P

But yea, Im in no rush to head butt my way into networking..Im gonna be working at Compusa real soon anyway - fixing people's crappy computers. From there, we will see what to do. But no way Im gonna do that for a whole year, as long as my friends work there, I can hang.

sprkymrk

szkizzer wrote:

The term "paper cert" actually comes from someone knowing the material, but not having ever worked on the actual equipment. Being a paper-cert doesn't mean someone cheated, it means they know the stuff on paper but not by hands-on experience.

So, am I a paper Cert then? I work night and day on my lab. and I certainly don't **** (don't see point). And I have prior networking experience, just not actual work, as in, "no pay".
Actually I know a lot about networking (excluding what I have learned form my CCNA self-Study). And the communication skills and all that Ive got it covered, afterall my "communication" does include talking in three language on a daily basis. hehe

:P

Well, it all depends. If you can DO, then no you're probably not a paper cert. Notice I used the term "hands-on" experience, not "paid" experience. However, a lab of 2-3 servers and a couple of workstations, router and switch in a very predictable environment where you installed everything and have no users that can break it, no production going on to load test, and no quirky applications that can cause conflicts is miles different than a live network.

It's still good, and it still tests basics and theory, but the many variables of a real live network are not thrown in. It's those "weird" instances that cause one to really dig deep for answers, solutions and work-arounds. Those things don't show up on the exam - you really can't be tested on that (nor would I want to be!). Labs are great but can only test your mettle so far.

What other languages do you speak?

mikej412

sprkymrk wrote:

If you can DO, then no you're probably not a paper cert. Notice I used the term "hands-on" experience, not "paid" experience.

I'd agree with that.

I'm not sure I'd call someone who dumped their way to a certification "paper" -- since their certificate isn't really worth the paper its printed on.

mmreed

szkizzer wrote:

Ok this is really getting on my nerves. Can you name one paper CCNA, that you interact with?

yes... I know several, one even being paper CCNA and MCSA with zero real world experience.

I was also just in a tech training course for Citrix... where one of the other students just graduated last year with his CCNA, and took Citrix... they guy never touched a corporate network, and currently works as a cell phone salesman.

so yes.. there are paper tigers out there....

MrNetTek

I think education - degrees and certs are a bunch of lip service. If Universities, Colleges, Cisco, or Microsoft really actually cared about the integrity of the exam process, they would do away with paper and spend the resources hiring more Technical Professionals as Lab Test Givers, meaning like the lab for the CCIE. I would be willing to pay more (for certs), if I knew a person would actually have to be knowledgeable and be able to prove their skills in a lab environment. Paper tests don’t prove real world skills…doing proves everything. I have known people to get a CCNA…and didn’t know how to plug in a router. I have seen MCSEs who didn't know how to set a static IP Address. Of course, I have also seen people with 4 and 6 year degrees who couldn't understand how to do basic word processing or setup a 5 slide presentation. It is sad really. Speaking only from an American point of view, I think America needs academic reform at all levels. I have worked in the field since 1993 and seen much in the workplace. We are lacking in hard skills, real dedication, and proper motivation. That's not to say there aren't great technical people out there...because there are many. But there isn't enough of us to drag all the slackers across the finish line. Paper tests out - hands-on labs in, better educators equal better professionals. For all those of us out there that work hard in the technical field, study hard for certs, and who have earned our education and experience HATS OFF TO US, for those of you out there who have skated by on test kings and brain ****, I hope the technical gods strike you down. - MrNetTek Citius Altius Fortius

bubble2005

I feel that experience is worth more than the paper actually. If you could have actually eliminated the "paper" and show them what you could have done, then you would have had more technical folks EMPLOYED.But NO, employers want to see all of the boastful glorious certification names etc. Brain ****, degrees, earning, to me all are in the same boat if you have no experience. You can sit your hip home all day with labs and gain every Microsoft and Cisco certification, but if you were never in the work place, which boat would you then place yourself in?

Forsaken_GA

itwannabe007 wrote: »

Just elaborate, what you think is worse. Is it worse for someone to bombard their selves in test engines / brain ****, to get a cert? OR Is it worse for an Instructor to give students the actual test questions for a chapter exam in a well known curriculum?

I knew you were talking about the Cisco Academy without reading any other post in the topic.

Our instructor gave us the questions verbally, and we weren't allowed to answer them in class. This had the effect of making people scramble to write the questions down. I don't think that's a bad thing, as it forces people to think and narrow their focus.

It also had the effect of forcing folks to gather after class to try and work out the answers.
I didn't think this was a bad thing, there was no way in hell they were going to study it otherwise.

I was far and away the best in my class, and the only one with any real interest in networking. I was the guy who stayed after class just to get some more times on the router racks to see if something I was thinking about would work. At some point during the year long curriculum, I realized my learning was being slowed down, so I just went ahead and took the CCNA, and I passed, this is with about 10 weeks left of Academy curriculum. At that point, I pretty much became the instructor's TA in class, because there was literally nothing left he could teach me, and he couldn't fail me - I'd just apply for exemption credit based on my CCNA.

Even before this, I had folks coming up to me for the chapter exams wanting to know the answers. I explained that I'd be happy to help them, but I wasn't going to let them copy my answers verbatim, but I'd be happy to help them work through the questions. Eventually, I routinely had a small group gathering with me after class the day before and before class the day of a chapter exam to work through the material. Sometime's I'd choose wrong answers and defend myself just to see if anyone would catch it and be willing to argue with me. And there were a few times where I was wrong, and was corrected.

Most folks who take the Cisco academy in school don't realize it's actually hard work. They hear Cisco certs are a good way to get a job with money, and they think it's easy since they've maybe put together a home network and setup the router for their ISP connection. Then the reality sets in that this is alot of work. Our class started at over 40 members, by the time of the 4th semester material, that number was under 20. I'd like to think that by forcing the folks who came to me for confirmation of the answers, I helped them to learn the material better, and without having the questions to the chapter exams, that wouldn't have happened.

I'm pretty sure it was in vain though, as I'd be very surprised if anyone else in the class even took the CCNA, let alone passed it.

maumercado

If you're being fed the answers -- you're not learning anything. If you ****, you're not learning anything. Either way is a waste of time.

Thats the whole point of this discussion...

Eventually if you get a job because of your certs or your degrees everyone will notice your lack of knowledge, specially when you start asking dumb questions with obvious answers for people who did study and did really wanted to learn not just to get a cert or degree.

amp2030

Another years old inflammatory thread risen from the dead this week.

MrNetTek

The reason I say labs are better than paper for testing, is because whether you're in the work place or not, a lab is where you should apply/test settings first. Any real job, with serious repercussions and heavy accountability, require you to submit change control to committees for all new integrated technology and modifications, which has been tested. Emphasis on tested. You don't roll-out software, unless it's tested. You don't setup a switch or a router on a live network. You don't setup a server connected to your active network. Everything is offline and usually in a lab. I currently work in healthcare, roughly 3000+ workstations, 250 servers, and 5000+ people. I can just see me explaining to my boss why the network is down because I looped the network by plugging in a Cisco switch that wasn't configured right. Or try explaining why the Exchange Server is down because I made an untested registry edit. You don't gain experience by wrecking equipment, you get fired. You gain experience by learning the ins and out of what your doing, testing it, submitting for authorization, and applying the change, and monitoring for technical equilibrium. - MrNetTek Citius Altius Fortius

sherifsherif

I just wonder how many person acted as if they were from another planet, or not talking the same language.... or maybe born experts?! The chicken first or the egg my friend? To sum up it's the chicken, long story though, but I'm not going to debate on this.

For those who gives little value for PAPER Certifications (with all due respect) what kind of alcohol gives the same effect? Simply, ur fully wrong. Watever certificates or college u got, this won't scare many as you think my friend, and yes if u said so u didn't completly understand what u have been going through for achieving ur certifications or degree, and any newbie here might be better off in some basics that u surely forgot and might give u help, fair enough? EXPERIENCE without edcation is nothing compared more than a child who catch a gun, and surely can shoot but never understood how dangerous it is, exaclty like many forums, wich i personaly visited, advertise Necut for example , WOW great tool, with this software u can cut anybody on the same Lan as u and get the whole bandwidth, Funny right? But the blind never knew what kind of tool he is using, and he never cared! All what he cared, and have time only for, is that he wanna experience the software blindly, while enjoying the bandwidth alone, without bothering his head with education or details! Is it arp spoofing? Or first step to MITM? or DOS my friend? So now after we did sum up the difference between the humble CERTIFICATION PAPER and experience things got clear, both go hand in hand my expert friend, and never disapoint those who just started or will start their way, i guess u started little as well, don't u my friend?

bubble2005

I concur with Sheriff's opinion. I'm a beginner in the networking field, and sometimes reading those posts, I begin to feel discouraged about everything.