I have the Indiana QC primer and know that it's allowed for the CQE exam, but what about problems I've worked out on my own that I've put in with certain sections of the primer. Will these be allowed?

They don't have any questions that go along with them just the working of a problem. From what the letter I received for the exam said, it sounds like you can use your own problems as long as they don't have questions along with them. What do you think?

I have the Indiana QC primer and know that it's allowed for the CQE exam, but what about problems I've worked out on my own that I've put in with certain sections of the primer. Will these be allowed?

They don't have any questions that go along with them just the working of a problem. From what the letter I received for the exam said, it sounds like you can use your own problems as long as they don't have questions along with them. What do you think?

When I took the CQA exam (today) they said specifically that "hand generated notes" were allowed. Exam notification also had it listed on the back of it that they were allowed under condition of review by the proctor. Since they were giving the CQE exam at the same time, using the same monitors & proctor, I think you would be allright.

I think that the examination body is relaxing on this point, but in the past, it wasn't allowed. Check your exam/seating notification to see if you get it. It should be spelled out there.

Regards,

Kevin

It's been awhile since I took the CQE (1992), but I remember clearly what they were looking for: all sorts of reference material were allowed, however, since the test questions changed little from year to year, they were looking for exact copies of the questions that would appear on the tests, along with the worked answers. I had a notebook full of worked answers with only numbers to identify the questions they had come from and they were allowed.

I think that what they are trying to avoid is a "look it up and copy the answer" type test response. Consistent with real world thinking, ASQ knows that you are going to pull out your previous work and the Qualiy Assurance Handbook when you encounter a new problem. They just want you to be able to think yourself to this point rather than looking up an exact question.

If it looks like a test question with answers, then it's not allowed. For example, the last time I used a QCI primer, the sample questions were on blue paper for easy identification and removal.

If it is personal notes - such as a worked-out problem that does not look like a test question - that should be OK.

I just took CQE exam June this year, they told me that hand-written notes are allowed in exam just without question and solution. You can summary the formulas in a paper and take into exam, doesnt matter. May some new proctors will question you but you can request the cheif-proctor's explain.

Good luck!

Thanks for all the responses. It looks like they should allow me to bring in my problems since there are no questions associated with them. I was actually ready for the test on Saturday, but we were hit by a snow storm and they postponed it until this Saturday.

Thanks for all the responses. It looks like they should allow me to bring in my problems since there are no questions associated with them. I was actually ready for the test on Saturday, but we were hit by a snow storm and they postponed it until this Saturday.

Good luck with your test on Saturday. I'm sure you will have no trouble with it.

Dave

I have never taken a CQ anything test, so bear with me. I do not mean to insult, or challenge anyone's integrity. I'm not attacking, here folks. I'm only asking for clarification.

It seems a bit odd for someone to be asking what can be taken into an exam. I find it interesting some of the comments that as long as it doesn't look like the test, you should be okay. So, if the test questions are available, and we figure out the answers ahead of time, and we can disguise them, so they can't be recognized, and take them to the test, isn't that kinda like cheating? If the test/answers situation is just a form of "game" that is played, then doesn't that make the test meaningless? I mean what value is the test if the questions are available prior to the test, and the the folks taking the test are allowed to bring answers with them during the test. I'm confused here. Help me out. :confused:

I took the CQE exam in 1985, and passed. We were allowed to bring reference notes, and books with us to use during the exam. No previous exams were allowed, and programable calculators were checked to make sure formulas of previous exams were not pre entered. This is a very difficult exam to pass, and at that time only 50% passed the exam the first time. If you have not done extensive preparation and study for this, I don't think it is practicable to think it can be passed. It definately is not cheating to use reference materials accepted by the requirements as stated above. When I took a prep refesher course with Stat-a-matrix, the instructor was a statistics professor at Rutgers. He asked our class of 38, "What am I here to teach you". Most responded "How to pass the CQE exam". he said "No, I am here to teach you how to think", and he did. 80% of us in that class passed the first time. If you don't know how to think and apply that thinking to the body to knowledge in the exam, then no amount of reference material will help.

I have never taken a CQ anything test, so bear with me. I do not mean to insult, or challenge anyone's integrity. I'm not attacking, here folks. I'm only asking for clarification.

It seems a bit odd for someone to be asking what can be taken into an exam. I find it interesting some of the comments that as long as it doesn't look like the test, you should be okay. So, if the test questions are available, and we figure out the answers ahead of time, and we can disguise them, so they can't be recognized, and take them to the test, isn't that kinda like cheating? If the test/answers situation is just a form of "game" that is played, then doesn't that make the test meaningless? I mean what value is the test if the questions are available prior to the test, and the the folks taking the test are allowed to bring answers with them during the test. I'm confused here. Help me out. :confused:

Dave:

Yes, that scenario would be possible, I guess, but it would be hard to "code" the answers to even a large minority of the questions.

Even with a library with you (I had 15 - 20 books with me for the CQM), without knowing the material time becomes a very real factor. Even knowing the material, I used some "time management" techniques to make sure the whole test was covered at least once.

Why not call ASQ and ask for the CQE brochure? It has the body of knowledge listed. I think you will agree that the range of material makes any strategy other than knowing your stuff foolhardy, IMO. It would be more trouble trying to figure out a way to beat the tests than it would be to go ahead and learn the material, I suspect.

And, I am surprised you have not taken at least one of the exams. You seem to have a good handle on the material.


:agree:


Craig

I have never taken a CQ anything test, so bear with me. I do not mean to insult, or challenge anyone's integrity. I'm not attacking, here folks. I'm only asking for clarification.

It seems a bit odd for someone to be asking what can be taken into an exam. I find it interesting some of the comments that as long as it doesn't look like the test, you should be okay. So, if the test questions are available, and we figure out the answers ahead of time, and we can disguise them, so they can't be recognized, and take them to the test, isn't that kinda like cheating? If the test/answers situation is just a form of "game" that is played, then doesn't that make the test meaningless? I mean what value is the test if the questions are available prior to the test, and the the folks taking the test are allowed to bring answers with them during the test. I'm confused here. Help me out. :confused:

Yes, I can see where you would think so. Exam questions are supplied with the study primer and used to give a feel for the tests given in the past. For the exam there are multiple versions of old ones from which to draw questions. The actual exam questions are not given up front. There is always a possibility that some of the questions may get duplicated from one year to another which is the reason for not allowing the old sample exams to be used as reference material. The test is an open book test based on the theory that our industry relies on resource material and the ability to know where to find the information.

When materials are taken into the test room, the monitors check to see if any of the green pages are still in the study primer (the old tests and answers are on green paper). Those are not allowed and would be removed. Also, they check your loose leaf notes to be sure you didn't duplicate any of those pages. As Ralph stated, calculators are cleared prior to the test. It is also possible that some reference material could be excluded at the examination site because the monitors felt it gave an unfair advantage. I don't think there is any "rule" for this other than the whim of the monitor. That is why you see so many questions about what is and is not allowed.

Hope that gives you a little better insight.

Dave

I am getting slow - Craig posted as I was typing.

I have attached the Body of Knowledge for Reliability Engineer

Dave

Ralph,

Sounds like the professor was a good one!!!

Dave,

Dave and Craig have pretty much summed it up. Without knowing the material, having a bunch of worked out problems won't help you much. Even with the revised format (the old format had the broken the exam into two 3-hour blocks, one covering the BoK, the other was for application), time is short. Spending any significant time running through your example problems will run you off the clock. In my experience, unless you have better than average understanding of the material, you won't finish the exam. I would even go so far to say that by having several worked out examples, it is a hindrance to your success.

I don't believe that the exam can be passed by the majority of folks merely by memorizing information or by having access to similar/same problems (CQE anyway).

Regards,

Kevin

I have never taken a CQ anything test, so bear with me. I do not mean to insult, or challenge anyone's integrity. I'm not attacking, here folks. I'm only asking for clarification.

It seems a bit odd for someone to be asking what can be taken into an exam. I find it interesting some of the comments that as long as it doesn't look like the test, you should be okay. So, if the test questions are available, and we figure out the answers ahead of time, and we can disguise them, so they can't be recognized, and take them to the test, isn't that kinda like cheating? If the test/answers situation is just a form of "game" that is played, then doesn't that make the test meaningless? I mean what value is the test if the questions are available prior to the test, and the the folks taking the test are allowed to bring answers with them during the test. I'm confused here. Help me out. :confused:

It really addresses real world situations. You can take in refernece materials, books, primers things like that. The main reason is they do not expect you to memorize everything in the subject matter. In fact - in the real world situation you are going to go to one of these books and look it up if you do not remember. Better yet you can come to the cove and get the info. They really should allow you to bring in a laptop and connect to the cove :vfunny: Seriously it is still up to the individual to know their material and where to find it. I went in to my CQE exam a year ago (passed - rah rah for me!) with the primer, and a couple of books from college. The guy next to me brought about 20 books and was lost trying to find things. Knowing where to find the answer is more improtant than knowing the answer off the top of your head. "Know-it-alls" usually do not do well on these exams.

By the way - there are usually five different tests and they rotate them randomly. So even if you have all the answers to a test a friend took, it doesn't mean you have all the right answers for the test you are taking. :lick:

Tom, You are right about the "know it alls". A guy at the next table to me brought in about 10 books, and said he had a masters degree in statistics.
About 2 hours before the end time was up, he picked up his books, turned in his exam to the proctor, put on his coat and left. Afterward, I said to the proctor, that that guy must have breezed through the exam. The proctor said, henever finished, just gave up and left. Preparation is everything. :)

For the record:

When taking the CQA, I happened to meet an old friend who I had worked with at a prior job. He showed up with three sharpened pencils, nothing else. I was shocked. Although I felt that I had a good mastery of the topic, I still brought the Primer and The Quality Audit with me.

He took the exam in 75 minutes, got up and left. I saw later his name in our section rag showing that he passed the exam. Pretty impressive, even if it was (in my opinion) an easier exam than the CQE. It was something he said before the audit that made all the sense in the world. His job for several years had been an internal auditor for a Fortune 500 organization. He said, "If I can't pass this exam, I've had no business being an auditor." He never came across as a know-it-all, nor did he come packing 20 books and an ego. I'd say that those carrying in 20 books are folks who haven't a mastery of the basics of audititing. Preparation and knowledge are essential, especially for the CQE.

Regards,

Kevin

Kevin you bring up a good point. Individuals that look to the certification exams as a tool for their profession usually do well because they want to succeed. I have seen others that just want to have it, thinking it will automatically bring them fortune??? :bonk:

Professionals that use the knowledge; understand the knowledge and practice it on an ongoing basis can mostly rely on their understanding of the knowledge. The CQE exam I took did not seem as hard as everyone was telling me it would be. However I was practicing with alot of the tools that the test covered, (DOE, audits, QMS, Reliability, Statistics, etc.) Thinking you can learn the info quickly or just through the primer is most of the time a mistake. Practical knowledge is always better than looking it up, as long as you practice the correct methods.

I'd say that those carrying in 20 books are folks who haven't a mastery of the basics of audititing. Preparation and knowledge are essential, especially for the CQE.


Kevin

Kevin:

My statement about 15 - 20 books for the CQM exam was made to point out the depth of knowledge needed for the CQM (and CQE). While I only used 2 - 3 of the books (why I sometimes get some of the gurus mixed up is beyond me) I was glad to have all of them, just in case.

Most of the books were texts that I had for school.

My point here is that, especially for folks that tend to "lock up" during tests, having access to too much is better than not having that one formula needed for a problem.

Of course, all of those books are kinda hard on the back!

Craig

Of course, all of those books are kinda hard on the back!

CraigOne very tiny person in one of my ASQ sections dragged her reference materials in on a luggage cart. She says proctor examined her stash and said, "No problem!"

An added tip is that you should either be VERY familiar with each reference work so you can readily find appropriate data or make notes on the Table of Contents or Index pages to cue your memory. Highlighter markers in multiple colors keyed to topics or margin notes which say "X book covers this material better, page _" work for some folks.

db,
I'll echo the others here: even with all of the reference material and worked answers the CQE is still a grueling 6 hour exam and you must know the material backwards and forwards to pass. I failed the first time (due to skipping a question and filling in the last 1/3 of the bubbles on the wrong lines). A year later, I passed with only Juran's QE manual, my CQE class notes, and one worked problem as references. I took the problem because it was very common on tests and quizzes and I had a habit of leaving out a step. Having it didn't stop me from spending 15 minutes working the same problem, with different numbers, on the exam.

Sorry, Craig, I didn't mean to generalize, but I did. My apologies. I hate it when I do that. Mental note: I must try to do better.

To your and Wes' point, the size of the stack is less important when the individual has knowledge. I think all of us have taken more books/reference material than we needed...just in case!! For me, I could see over my stack, so I suppose that this is a good sign!! :biglaugh: However, if I thought I had another book that might have been useful, I'd have dragged it along.

Kevin

Sorry, Craig, I didn't mean to generalize, but I did. My apologies. I hate it when I do that. Mental note: I must try to do better.

To your and Wes' point, the size of the stack is less important when the individual has knowledge. I think all of us have taken more books/reference material than we needed...just in case!! For me, I could see over my stack, so I suppose that this is a good sign!! :biglaugh: However, if I thought I had another book that might have been useful, I'd have dragged it along.

Kevin


Kevin, no apology needed. I suspect you may be right for the CQA, where experience really, really makes a difference (Doesn't it? I have not taken that one...yet, so its just a guess).

And, as you stated, the books do not make the test taker. I am sure that there are some (likely right here on the Cove) that could ace the CQM, CQE, etc. without references. I'm just not one of them.

Maybe it is a sign of how much better I was prepared for the CQM compared to the CQE. For the CQE I had a small stack that I could carry with one hand, and had to take the test twice. For the CQM, it took 2 book hauling trips to the car. I finished, and passsed the first try, with time to spare.

Test taking is a learned skill, and we each have to learn what works for us. Kinda like a quality management system, my system works for me. If someone tries to copy mine for use as their system, all bets are off.

:agree:

Craig

I took the CQA as a preliminary step to the CQE. It worked for me in the sense that as far as the BoK for the CQE went, this was one area I basically skipped. This of course gave me more time to concentrate on other things. I've thought about the CQM, at least in the early days when they broke out the CQM material from the CQE, but haven't had that itch to scratch. Generally speaking, there is always some level of overlap between certifications, so if you think it's worth it, take the CQA in May.

From the standpoint of what certification is most practical, the CQA and CQM might lead the way. Senior level management know how these pieces fit, but with regards the CQE, I think that while understanding is growing, it still lags behind the others (even though, perhaps, the CQE certification being the most coveted amongst Quality professionals).

Regards,

Kevin

I took the CQA as a preliminary step to the CQE. It worked for me in the sense that as far as the BoK for the CQE went, this was one area I basically skipped. This of course gave me more time to concentrate on other things. I've thought about the CQM, at least in the early days when they broke out the CQM material from the CQE, but haven't had that itch to scratch. Generally speaking, there is always some level of overlap between certifications, so if you think it's worth it, take the CQA in May.

From the standpoint of what certification is most practical, the CQA and CQM might lead the way. Senior level management know how these pieces fit, but with regards the CQE, I think that while understanding is growing, it still lags behind the others (even though, perhaps, the CQE certification being the most coveted amongst Quality professionals).

Regards,

Kevin


Kevin:

For what its worth, to me the CQE is the more "practical" of the two. The CQM is much more theory oriented, and that is why the CQE is more highly thought of, generally, IMO.

Also, preparing for the CQE opens doors into how other industries test their materials. That made the exercise a lot more interesting. For instance, before studying for the CQE, if you said "eddy current" I would assume you were going whitewater rafting or fly fishing. Will I ever need to know about eddy current professionally? Maybe not, but if it does come up there will at least be a little knowledge to fall back on.

And, I won't get wet because I started talking about paddling techniques.

Craig

Hi, everyone.

I would like to ask a question, and this seems to be a good place to put it, given the direction the thread has taken:

How do the CQX's (ASQ professional certifications) compare in worth to certification to the ISO/QS Q mangement systems?

I realize that we are comparing apples and oranges, but they are both a form of certification, no?

I am just curious and would like to see your thoughts.

Craig

Hi, everyone.

I would like to ask a question, and this seems to be a good place to put it, given the direction the thread has taken:

How do the CQX's (ASQ professional certifications) compare in worth to certification to the ISO/QS Q mangement systems?

I realize that we are comparing apples and oranges, but they are both a form of certification, no?

I am just curious and would like to see your thoughts.

Craig

I would say this. My experience has shown that quality professionals recognize others with ASQ certifications as individuals that have a certain level of knowledge about the subject of certification and as "professionals" in the subject matter. This is not exclusive however, I know many people that do not have any certification from ASQ and know a lot about the subject matter. But it is a professional certification that states you have met a certain criteria or level of knowledge in the specific subject. Doesn't mean you are qualified to do anything, just certified in the subject matter. Employeers are starting to understand them more as well. Many companies are looking for or accepting CQE for example in lieu of college degrees for Quality Engineers. I have always said - I know a lot of people with college educations that are flipping burgers. (No offense to the flipper). ASQ certification shows a level of expertise in the field, a level of committment to the field. JMO.

Conversely, ISO / QS certification doesn't really mean much. I know that when this all started with QS one of the original goals was to eliminate customer audits on the quality system. That never happened. Customers have learned that QS doesn't automatically mean consistant effective quality systems. They want to see the process for themselves.

Hope I got your questions right:confused:

I would say this. My experience has shown that quality professionals recognize others with ASQ certifications as individuals that have a certain level of knowledge about the subject of certification and as "professionals" in the subject matter. This is not exclusive however, I know many people that do not have any certification from ASQ and know a lot about the subject matter. But it is a professional certification that states you have met a certain criteria or level of knowledge in the specific subject. Doesn't mean you are qualified to do anything, just certified in the subject matter. Employeers are starting to understand them more as well. Many companies are looking for or accepting CQE for example in lieu of college degrees for Quality Engineers. I have always said - I know a lot of people with college educations that are flipping burgers. (No offense to the flipper). ASQ certification shows a level of expertise in the field, a level of committment to the field. JMO.

Conversely, ISO / QS certification doesn't really mean much. I know that when this all started with QS one of the original goals was to eliminate customer audits on the quality system. That never happened. Customers have learned that QS doesn't automatically mean consistant effective quality systems. They want to see the process for themselves.

Hope I got your questions right:confused:

Tom, I would also say that the opposite is also true. To Registrars, RAB (or similar) is far more valuable than ASQ. I guess the difference is what is buttering your bread. If you are a "Quality" person, then ASQ holds the most weight. If you are a "Registration" person, then ASQ is not so meaningful. FWIT, in the "real" scheme of things. I think that managing quality (ASQ) is far more important than maintaining registration (RAB). Like you said: "QS doesn't automatically mean consistant effective quality systems".