Couldn't agree more. Sometimes I think Microsoft do it on purpose in writing novel size questions. They should as you put it just get to the point and make the questions short and sweet.

Given that its using statistical analysis and all statistics by definition have a margin of error, I would be very surprised if there are not a lot of false positives and genuine hard working individuals who get banned for life for doing nothing wrong. It is microsoft afterall. Agree with the guy above, just look at the genuine advantage program - I have came across many false positives myself.

I read a while ago that Cisco already uses this type of technology. They’ll analyze answering patterns, time, etc…

However, I don’t usually hear it being discussed much. I don’t think there’s enough to suspend a person for life, but probably enough to disqualify the exam, and note the user-profile in the vendor’s database.

But....

For Microsoft at least, this suggests that if anything is deemed as an offence, it means a life time ban. There's no in-between, no taking the exam again, no having a note on their exam record. In short, if you are expected to have cheated, they'll have to let you pass and carry on as though nothing happened or completely expell you.

it will be done on amount of time taken to answer a question. end of day the computer doesnt think for itself it just looks for a trend that a programmer sets. i honestly cant see how they could programe anything else other than amount of time taken to answer question and pass etc. lets just hope someone with super fast reading skills doesnt take the exam (saw a program where a man could read a page of writting so fast youd think he wasnt reading it at all lol)

They're not too confusing if you know what is fluff and what is relevant. That comes only with experience, mate.

Not exactly accurate. They can do whatever they want with their certification program... including retesting someone (with active monitoring) who looks as if they have cheated, if that's their desire to do so. Or to have you explain the logic behind your choices. It's their choice. It's their program, folks. This isn't a governmental body, with due process and all that legal stuff. They can bestow a credential... and they can take it away for whatever reason they decide. But don't get unduly upset at Microsoft; make no mistake - **any** certification vendor - CompTIA, Cisco, Oracle, you name it - can do the same.

Bottom line is this: if you don't like their decision - which, thus far, has resulted in exactly zero bans - then don't get their certifications, and simply allow everyone else to get them.

That said, it is my belief that if you take an exam honestly, you likely have nothing to fear.

I haven't yet listened to Trika's presentation on Exam Forensics... but I will *bet* you that several of your worries can be answered there.

Just a note, guys... Microsoft Learning and Microsoft development are about as different as they come. Not saying that either of them do things well or poorly... I'm just saying that to lump them all together because they come under the same Microsoft umbrella company is to be illogical. That'd be like saying that I likely do a poor job of creating practice exam questions because we have a poor sales person (neither of which are true, for the record).

Sure, I could understand if you were to slam a Microsoft OS based on a previous Microsoft OS, or one piece of Microsoft software based on another piece of Microsoft software... but you're lumping together two completely dissimilar departments with two completely different functions.

I'd just like to point out that whenever MS introduces a new security feature, it's generally not seen as a benefit by the users of their products. My experiences as of late with their new security features have been so bad that I'm not inclined to feel charitable towards any MS offerings.

That and I'm a firm believer in Finagle's Law.

Indeed. Which is why I now invest the bare minimum required into certification and am instead pursuing those nifty things called degrees.

...and if your college or university believes that you have cheated, then they too can prevent you from getting that nifty little degree as well.

True, dat. But they usually do things like subject you to an oral examination to see if you understand the material in question or at least give you a chance to explain yourself if they have concerns about skulduggery on your part. They don't just expel you based on statistical probabilities, as MS is claiming to do.

MS simply says they CAN expel you based on statistical probabilities. Doesn't mean they won't quiz you on the spot to see if you know your stuff, just to confirm or assuage their suspicions. I don't think they're going to indiscriminately throw around the ban-stick... after all, they ban an obscenely small number of people at present when they could likely do so much more often (even without the statistical algorithms). To be honest, I *hope* they start banning more people... it MIGHT actually cause people to think twice before using braindumps!!

That's a great idea. However, they'll simply test elsewhere and steal exams from those locations instead. All it takes is ONE corrupt employee in ONE test center...

Well, if all you need is one corrupt test center somewhere in the world, you just have to have someone willing to harvest those questions in that location. Given the millions of dollars they make, I'm sure an airplane ticket isn't going to be that much of an added expense.