In Parts I and II of the Series we looked at
the issue of course-to-exam mapping for Microsoft exams. Often courses don't map
perfectly to exams. That is, exams often test on material that either is or
appears to be outside the courses that the exams are supposed to be based on.
There are a variety of reasons for this. But, the primary reason is that
Microsoft exams are designed to test you on your "real-world" knowledge and
skills, not on your ability to memorize the courseware. In order to test your
"real-world" skills, Microsoft designs exam items that require you to do more
than simply recall information. To better understand Microsoft exams and, as a
result, to improve your ability to study for the exams, it is instructive to
look at how Microsoft creates exams.
Many people might be surprised to learn that, although
MS is responsible for exam development, MS staff generally do not write the exam
items that appear on the exams. For the most part, exam items are written by
contractors from outside MS. Exam item writers will receive training from MS on
how to write items so they meet the requirements for the exams. For example, one
of the requirements of the Windows 2000 exams is they be targeted at an audience
that has a minimum of one year's experience supporting Windows 2000 in
environments that have 200+ users and multiple physical locations. Exam item
writers are also provided instruction on how to use Bloom's Taxonomy to guide
the construction of questions.
Bloom's Taxonomy for the cognitive domain is a model
that classifies 6 different levels of cognitive behavior, from the simple recall
of facts through more increasingly complex and abstract levels. The six levels
of Bloom's Taxonomy are:
Exam writers are instructed to avoid writing questions
that test at the lowest levels of Bloom's Taxonomy, for example, asking
questions that require candidates to choose the appropriate tool to use in a
particular situation or correctly match a term with a definition. These kinds of
questions do not require anything beyond the ability to simply recall or
comprehend information. However, a question that asked a candidate to calculate
subnet masks for a given network configuration might be appropriate for an exam
item as long as it was constructed in such a way that the candidate had to do
more than simply recall a table of subnet masks, for example, plan subnet masks
for a hierarchical router environment.
Along with the training that exam writers receive on
Bloom's Taxonomy, they are also given a list of exam objectives, also known as
the objective domain, to write on. MS develops the objective domains according
to a rigorous process. As part of this development process, MS performs a Job
Task Analysis (JTA) survey that is sent out to industry professionals. The
results of the survey help MS determine the skills and the tasks associated with
successfully deploying, implementing, and managing particular technologies.
Notice here that the courseware is not used to determine
the exam objectives. The exam item creation process is driven primarily by
Bloom's Taxonomy and the objective domain, not the courseware. Having said that,
the courseware will overlap significantly with the exams for two reasons:
1) the courseware will be teaching similar skills and
knowledge identified in the JTA survey, and
2) the course materials may themselves be used as a
technical resource to develop exam items. However, the exam writers will be
consulting their own experience and a number of different technical resources;
they may, if they wish, avoid the courseware entirely as a resource for writing
items.
Once the exam writers have written their questions, they
submit them for review to editors at MS. The role of the editors is to help
ensure that the questions adequately map to a high enough level on Bloom's
Taxonomy, that they map properly to the objective domains, that they are clearly
expressed, and that they are not tricky or deceiving (no bogus interface names
or commands, for example). Questions may have to be revised many times before
they can go on to the next stage.
Once the questions make it past the editorial review,
they are submitted for technical review. The technical review, also known as an
Alpha review, is a face-to-face meeting involving technical contributors and
editors. The purpose of...
You must be logged in to view this entire article. Click Here to Finish Reading this Article
Email this Article
Print this Article
