CompuServe Messages

Hi Steve, OK, let me take a run at some of your questions and comments: First re the distribution of the data, we have no problem sharing the data ONCE WE HAVE IT and when it can be compiled into a recognizable and comparable format. While we have "had" an exam for several years now, it has gone through many purposeful changes. All of these have been improvements based on the experiences that preceeded them and on input from the examinees, employers, ATC's, dealers and others. Some of the improvements that we have made are in the very area of data collection and analysis that you too are putting a focus on in this discussion. We could not agree with you more about the importance of this data, but "garbage in/garbage out" as you know is a concern with data and the results of the changes to our exams over the years has been that the data we have is not very comparable. Also, in relative terms of the sampling one needs to make such data have any accuracy, our numbers are very small. So please do not misinterpret Bill's comments nor our limitations in terms of data distribution as any indication of our desire to constrain such disclosures. Not sure how up to date you are on the status and history of the exam, but we have only gone to the new computerized implementation of the exams and two levels of exams as of this month! So please bear with us and continue to help us understand how to further improve the exam process and especially the benifits to our customers and instructors. On this later topic of instructor development, can you comment on how you would see the exam best serving the needs of instructors? Re our ongoing efforts to increase the number of testing sites out there, this whole area of electronic/computerized testing is VERY new to all and thus brings with it the usual challenges of "bleeding edge" endevors! <g> It requires a significant investment in training, equipment, facilities and time, so I don't think it should be too surprising that growth of these sites is going as fast as we would like. (we are often impatient!) One last request in conclusion here (for now); could you summarize or otherwise give us some insight into what you are hearing when you say "I get many negative comments on the test from individuals that I deal with in industry on the concept and importance of the ACE." What specifically are their concerns? What would they like to see changed? What benefits do they want? And one clarification; when you ask "Does(sic) professional CADD users in industry and the world of work see testing and certification differently than what Autodesk perceives as the test?", you should be aware that our decision to enter the area of testing and certification came from pressures and demands from users, employers, dealers and other vendors. As I believe you are also aware, the needs and attention being focussed on such things as skill standards are global and universal. This is why we are making such commitments to skill standards movements internationally, certification and testing. It is no conincidence that you are seeing so many vendors introducing certification and testing programs, governments introducing skill standards initiatives, political attention on this area such as the recent G7 "Jobs Summit" and so on. So, while I am sure that there are differences of opinions as to how to address the needs best, my point is that this is NOT an "Autodesk centric" situation. We are doing what we think will best meet the needs of our customers and improve the overall quality of the CAD community. Keep the input coming and we will surely succeed in such improvment, albeit never soon enough! Well, lucky for you I am out of battery power here on the airplane, so back to you….. wayne =====