This week's book giveaway is in the OO, Patterns, UML and Refactoring forum. We're giving away four copies of Refactoring for Software Design Smells: Managing Technical Debt and have Girish Suryanarayana, Ganesh Samarthyam & Tushar Sharma on-line! See this thread for details.
My take on this is any kind of mock exam is not good. This means that you have coached yourself into the exam rather than evaluating yourself as a Java Architect which is the main issue here. You could very well take the mock and get a pass mark but then that nullifies your project experience. Afterall we do not expect architects to be of less experience.
In real life scenarios architects are required to solve many complex problems and come by with solid understanding. If without any mock exam someone can pass this exam it means that the potential architect has good experience. Someone who scores say anyting beyond 90% and no experience with mock test is definitely a seasoned architect.
I would say there is no harm in taking a repeat of this exam rather than investing in a mock packages.
Joined: Aug 07, 2008
Thank you! Anyway I already know my experience, and I will not lose it just because I make mock exams. The problem is a company may believe in the SCEA and not only in the experience I say I have.
What I wouldn't like at all is this situation: Imagine I know very much about the topics of the exam because I've worked for years on it, but I get surprised by the way they ask me something or some details I didn't take into acount, so I don't pass the exam. On the other hand there's someone who knows much less than I, but makes some mock exams and she/he passes the exam thanks to it. My time and money is not given back and the SCEA went to the other one's resume, not mine. If we care only for experience and not for exams, it's easier to forget about not only mock exams, but SCEA itself. That's my point of view but I really thank you for your opinion.