CLD Grading?

[mfitzsimons]

Julie,

No worries, it is not fatal.  The test is intended to be difficult.  How would you feel taking a test that anyone could pass?

Tip for the future.  Do ALL of the examples.  Follow the LabVIEW style guide checklist.  Use Queued Message Handlers or State Machines.  This demonstrates you mastery of data flow and use of design structures.  Learn to program fast.  This is a timed test that is very difficult to complete in 4 hours.

Good Luck in the future,

Matt

Message Edited by mfitzsimons on 05-25-2006 10:26 AM

[LV_Pro]

ditto

[FTI_Newton]

When I got my results back, I was quite annoyed. I passed, so maybe I shouldn't care, but I got dinged heavily for things that were obviously not a problem, while things I knew were weak points were not even commented on. (Believe me, I know - I used to teach LabVIEW classes for NI). The worst:

"Sequence structure used for other than initializing and shutdown" WHAT?!? Show me the data flow between two "Beep.vi" nodes and I'll gladly wire it, because that's the only sequence in my exam. It seems like the grader has a "zero-tolerance rule" in their head that supercedes actually understanding the 'offending' technique. (Should I have put them in separate subsequent states? BEEP1 and BEEP 2? )

BTW, who is this 'group' that grades the exams? If it's Applications Engineering (tech support), that would be a crying shame.

[mfitzsimons]

Sequence structures are considered bad but sounds like you used them properly to control the flow between objects an not sequence your program.  Sometimes they can't be avoided because not all LV subVIs have error in and out that is considered good coding pratice 😉  You passed, no worries, and enjoy your holiday.

[RavensFan]

I wonder if you had put a comment in the sequence structure along the lines "Sequence structure was used because there is no other way to enforce data flow." would have helped?  Then if they still dinged you even though you are very specifically telling them you know what you are doing ......

I wonder if the NI graders are using tools like the VI analyzer to help grade the exams.  How else could you explain the earlier post where the person what hurt for doing many wire bends even though they had the minimum that were necessary.  If VI analyzer says you have x number of wires with more than 3 bends, then they take off points without acutally looking at the code to see if the places where the wire bends more times is logical, clean, and necessary.

[Ben]

Ravens fan wrote "I wonder if the NI graders are using tools like the VI analyzer to help grade the exams. "

I was thinking the same!

Although its not a bad tool to start a review, the VIA standards are designed to be adjusted for the circumstances. The situation mentioned above sounds like one of those cases.

Ben

[Mexico City]

As one of those people who still occasionally grades CLD exams, I can give some background to the marking process.

CLD exams are graded by a small group of engineers in the Customer Education Course Development Group. Exam grading is a two stage process where the exam is first marked by an engineer and a second engineer checks the marking and concurs. The graders use a marking template to provide guidance on what should be evaluated and how many marks should be deducted (along with lots of training). The "How Can I prepare for the Certified LabVIEW Developer (CLD) Certification Exam" document pretty much replicates the marking template that we use. The template generates a set of standard comments that are included in the evaluation form candidates receive with their exam results. This process is designed to ensure as consistent marking process and eliminate individual opinions on what should and should not be marked.

We do not currently use the VI Analyser to mark exams. The main reason for this is that a human being can look at an exam submission see what the intent of the candidate was when writing the application and adjust the marking accordingly. In other words, if the application does not work, but the examiner can tell that the candidate ran out of time and was 99% of the way to completing the application, then it will be taken into account. As was suggested in an earlier post comments in the LabVIEW application are a great way for candidates to communicate information back to the examiner; we do read them.

I cannot comment on specific exams, but be assured that everyone who marks exams does so with the intent of giving a passing mark. We want everyone to pass the exam, while at the same time maintaining the standards that we have set.

Regards,

David Corney

Customer Education Program Manager

National Instruments

[tbob]

This is very good feedback.  I am glad to know that a human is involved, and VI Analyzer is not.  Also it is good to know that the grading process is controlled to where a passing grade is not left up to the whim of a certain examiner.

BTW, I passed the CLD.  I'm now certified!!!!! 

[Ben]

Congratulations tbob!

and...

Thank you David!

Note to future readers:

Although the VI Analyzer is NOT used for grading, it can serve as a "tutor" to help prepare for the certification exams. If you can get into the habit of developing code the VIA is happy with, your style is well on its way to being acceptable.

Ben

[LV_Pro]

congratulations to both of you for passing. tbob, we had heard that you were certifiable!