Ubuntu Certified Professionals

[Daniel Carrera]

email.listen at googlemail.com wrote:
> Not exactly.
> To say it once again, tests like LPI exams don't examine skills thei only 
> examine if someone is able to learn a bunch of answers to given questions.

That would only be true if the LPI exam has the same set of questions 
every time. I'm sure this is not the case. If each exam is different, 
they they constitute a representative sample of knowledge points which 
give you an idea of the testee's skill. This is the same thing that any 
exam ever invented does.

> What is needed is a 'examination' or consideration how the skills are 
> achieved. 

What do you mean by 'examination'? The definition of examination that I 
know includes LPI. And why does it matter how the skills are achieved? 
This is, IMO, the wrong approach. What matters is what skills you have, 
not whether you took a certain course.

> This can be done in the classic school way by visiting classes or courses.

Requiring a particular course is unfair, bureocratic and unnecessary. 
And it puts the wrong sort of motivation on the exam board.

> Another way would be a community driven selfexamination under given rules by a 
> group of people who are in the position to judge the knowledge and the win of 
> knowledge of each other.

Okay, so you're talking about pratical assessment. Provided that the 
assessors are properly qualified, this can be a good assessment method.

> Its just the other way round.
> Not an exam judges a skill but the way how this skills where achieved. 

I disagree and I have 8 years of teaching experience to back my 
position, plus my experience working for an exam board. *Some* exams 
might do that. But to say that *all* exams do that is simply wrong. And 
your proposal of using a course is precisely the opposite of what you 
claim to promote. You say that the problem with exams is that they test 
how a skill was achieved, and yet you want pupils to take a particular 
course.

> If we would have a only exam oriented educational system there would be no 
> need for schools anymore.

You would need schools to prepare pupils for the exams. I understand 
where you're coming from. You are worried about the dillution of the 
education system and schools becoming "exam factories". And I realize 
that this is a problem in many places. But this isn't a necessary 
consequence of all exams. For example, you suggested using a community 
driven examination. That is still an exam. It's an exam of a different 
sort, but it's an exam.

> Following what you just mentioned would be a system 
> whithout any schools.

No, that is not a logical consequence of what I said. Believe me, I'm 
trained in logic (I'm a mathematecian). Saying that a test should not 
force you to take a particular course does not imply that we should 
abolish schools. Rather, it means that schools should have the freedom 
to choose teaching methods and courses that they prefer as long as they 
properly target the desired criteria.

> Courses is one way how skills can be learned. 
> As I mentioned self study groups are another way.
> The big advantage of those groups is that they offer a high potential of 
> motivation for futher involvement,

And the advantage of an exam that doesn't force you to take a specific 
course is that it gives you the option to take a different course or to 
form study groups.

I think you are contradicting yourself. You say that using an exam that 
doesn't require a particular course will mean the abolition of schools 
and on the next paragraph you praise different learning methods.

>>>I'm just mentioned that supporting another LPI examination will be
>>>desastrous and contraproductive in the end.
>>
>>I don't understand how that's supposed to happen. 
> 
> Amazing, you just wiped out my explanation i gave in my posting.

What's amazing? It is proper netiquette to only quote the part I'm 
responding to. I read your entire email, but I don't need to quote 
everything to tell you that I didn't follow your logic.

> So I have to say it again:
> 
> "But for this you may ask other people from germany who must see most high 
> rated and well known education institutes passing away over the last ten 
> years and this because of the acceptance of this stupid braindump tests, 
> MCSE, ..., and LPI."
> 
> So to say it once again ;)

And once again you haven't said anything. Repeating the same thing again 
doesn't make it clearer and it doesn't make people agree with you. If 
you want to convince someone and your first argument doesn't work you 
need to rephrase the argument. What you wrote here is no explanation of 
anything. You said *nothing*. I don't know what you are trying to 
communicate. Don't keep re-posting it, explain it! I seriously don't 
have the faintest clue of what you were trying to say here. All I can 
tell is that you are calling LPI stupid. That is not an argument.

>>>What I was talking about is a community driven strategy/system which
>>>scopes the education from a novice (a private users) point of view up to
>>>a professional training and examination. As high as an university degree
>>>if offered.
>>
>>I don't know what you mean by this.
> 
> What I see now are several attempts which will (most probably) lead into the 
> well known hirarchical training / education systems.

What hierarchical system? How does the LPI give you a hirarchical system?

> And therefore I was 
> talking about the barriers which will result from this.

An exam that doesn't require a particular course looks like a low 
barrier to me. An exam that does require a specific course looks like a 
high barrier to me.

> The gap between a 
> novice education and the professional one is too big and will result in the 
> loss of mobilization of manpower.

What do you mean by "novice education"? What exactly is your definition 
of "professional education"? How does this gap relate to the LPI? And 
what does the LPI have to do with labour mobility?

>>I'm sorry, I really don't see what problems you are talking about. What
>>gap are you talking about? I really don't understand you.
> 
> My intention is not pledging against an exam and a professional training but 
> for a strategy which will allow everyone to find his place for participation 
> in the end.

What do you mean by "pledging against an exam"? Who is "pledging" 
against a professional training? How does the LPI prevent people from 
participating?

> E.G. by having self study groups which will be the base for 
> further training or education on a higher level. 

How does the LPI prevent study groups? I'd think that study groups would 
be a natural way to prepare for the LPI.

> May be a native english speaker from the field of education science / 
> pedagogics may explain this better than I do, my poor english. *grumbl*

I'm not a native speaker, but my background is in education and science.

Daniel.
-- 
      /\/`) http://opendocumentfellowship.org
     /\/_/
    /\/_/   A life? Sounds great!
    \/_/    Do you know where I could download one?
    /