David,

>Yes. Actually any medical reference was acceptable ( just as it is in the
>real world ) for the correct diagnosis. As to time limits you had several
>weeks if memory serves correctly.

So that proves that the doctor knew how to find a certain percentage of the correct answers -- either from his head, his books, or his friends or accomplices. :-)

>As you didn't clarify I will assume that something on the level of a State ID
>was one of the requirements and not just a library card with picture was accepted. As I mentioned earlier, from my youth I know that it is very easy to get a State ID with your ( just for sake of argument ) information and my picture. So even this cannot guarentee that YOU actually took the test.

True, but probably a better form of screening than *no* identity checking. From the MS cert site:

You will be required to show two forms of identification, including one photo ID (such as a driver's license or company security ID), before you take the exam. Certification candidates are also be required to accept the terms of a Non-Disclosure Agreement before taking certification exams.

Consequences of Violating Testing Center Rules

Keeping exams as secure as possible helps maintain the value of Microsoft certification and ensures that only qualified information technology professionals are identified as MCPs. Testing center proctors are authorized to take immediate, appropriate measures against candidates who are caught violating testing rules as explained to all candidates when they appear for the exam. (Examples of cheating include using notes brought into the testing center, copying test questions, and looking at the monitors of other test takers.) This policy is enforced to ensure the integrity and security of certification exams and the MCP program.

If a candidate is caught violating testing rules once, the candidate:

-loses credit for the exam being taken at the time the candidate is caught, loses credit for all Microsoft certification exams passed, and loses all certifications earned.
-is ineligible to take a Microsoft certification exam for six months.

If a candidate is caught violating testing rules a second time, the candidate is permanently ineligible for any Microsoft certification.


>I wouldn't argue ethics or integrity are what they once were either. It is this exact reason why even a M$ tightly controlled test environment cannot guarentee the results of any one individual.

Correct, but they can guarantee the results of a *much* higher percentage than an anonymous type of test with no attempt to verify identity or control the test-taking environment.

>However, I will comment that in what you have described it sounds as though M$ has gone out of its way to control the enviorment and therefore increase the integrity of its certification process. The bottom line is do you feel you received something from this process?

Yes. I became a better developer by focusing on the issues and technologies involved in these tests. Future benefits remain to be seen.

>If you do it really doesn't matter what anyone thinks. The process was successful.

Only if the reason for the process is to have me receive something. I believe the purposes of certification go far beyond that, and therefore the "did you receive something" test is not the only measure of a test's success.