[Owasp-cert] Deadlines for August

Leigh Honeywell leigh at hypatia.ca
Fri Jul 25 21:31:12 EDT 2008


I'm also on board with not wanting a pure multiple-guess exam.  I don't
think that we can bring much of value to that space - it's already well
covered.

-Leigh

Matthew Chalmers wrote:
> No offense to James but again I agree with David. I think pure
> multiple-guess should be avoided--not to mention a pure multiple-guess
> product that's been rushed because of concerns with time to market or
> delivering 'something ok' sooner rather than 'something good' later.
>  
> Matt
> 
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 7:40 PM, David H. <dmalloc at users.sourceforge.net
> <mailto:dmalloc at users.sourceforge.net>> wrote:
> 
>     > If we stick to simple multiple choice for the first exam, it means
>     that we
>     > have delivered something of value and can in the meantime buy us
>     more time
>     > to work on more complex scenarios.
>     >
>     That is exactly what I try to dispute. I do not see any value in
>     Multiple Choice Questionaires not even when you are purely testing for
>     relearned value. That stems from a long history with Multiple Choice
>     Tests and the desire to create meaningful exams for a new paradigm of
>     learning.
>     --
>     Sent from gmail so do not trust this communication.
>     Do not send me sensitive information here, ask for my none-gmail
>     accounts.
> 
>     "Therefore the considerations of the intelligent always include both
>     benefit and harm." - Sun Tzu
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-cert mailing list
> Owasp-cert at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-cert



More information about the Owasp-cert mailing list