I would say, if students are struggling with PBQ's, it's because they are not going deep enough in their learning.

I've mentioned before, I am a big fan of Bloom's Taxonomy and the certifications generally aimed at the Application layer of the Cognitive Domain. This means that it's not nearly enough that a student can define, identify, and describe a thing. And it's still not deep enough that they are able to explain, relate, or describe something (even though many of the imperative questions in the domains often say 'explain'). Students need to be able to apply those things, use them to solve problems, and choose which ones are needed for different scenarios.

This is the dividing line between academic knowledge and practitioner experience.

I remember one question from the Net+ PBQ that was brought up in the 008 TTT. It required the learner know particulars of specific technology from a reverse angle - that is, if you need a 10Gbps throughput on a Layer 2 circuit, what kind of SFP would do the job? It wasn't enough that the student knew what an SFP or QSFP was, or what their throughputs are. But which SFP do you use to solve the problem? Do you just select QSFP+, knowing that a 40Gbps module would work for a 10Gbps job, or do you get the one that does the 10Gbps SFP+, but meanwhile, considering if there is a future-proof requirement?

It's this kind of depth that the PBQ's require.

So, in short, if they struggle with PBQ's, go deeper. Keep asking the WHY question.

Here is an active verb sheet for Bloom's, which may assist with this.

HTH

/r

1650247594865.png
 

Jarrel

Well-known member
  • Feb 17, 2020
    350
    1
    522
    Australia
    www.jarrelrivera.com
    I usually do a review with my students after they do the labs because there are times where they fall on the trap of just following the bouncing ball.
    I would ask them like, what port was used? what is the command? why that command? what is the sub command, etc?

    The reason is that, CompTIA cert exams are no longer bookish. It is no longer just a matter of memorizing tons of material rather, the exams now test if the student really knows the stuff - which is good, in my opinion.
     
    While we can't directly tell students the PBQs they might face, we can tell them the general types. CompTIA only has so many simulations in their library. For Core II there are command line sims, router sims, phone setup sim, etc. etc. So what we do, and I advise folks to do, is get hands on in those areas. Have your students set up a router (or use some of the emulators online), set up a phone's email, and work a lot with the various utilities at the command line to prepare them for what they might face without obviously directly giving them questions and answers from the exam itself.
     

    WillieJoe3

    Well-known member
    Jun 22, 2020
    10
    9
    Appreciate the feedback guys. Am I correct in assuming that any objective that starts with"Given a scenario" is a potential simulation? That would help in fine tuning my trainings. A+ isn't rocket science, but it is an enormous amount of information to digest in 16 weeks. My evaluation is based on how many of my students get certified, which isn't ideal, but it's what I signed up for.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: MrDee
    Am I correct in assuming that any objective that starts with"Given a scenario" is a potential simulation?
    No, it could just be a scenario given as text in a multiple choice or multiple select question. Not always sims.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: WillieJoe3
    I love that the CASP+ has a VM environment lab question. I wish every exam had multiple VM questions.
    As far as I know, the plans (if the ones in CASP+ go well) is to incorporate them in more exams going forward.