what is respect ful ocpjp6 score

[sagar kumar nerella]

this is sagar i have cleared the ocpjp6 exam thru pearsonvue.com testing site with 73% on jul 8th 2011 is it a good score?

to apply for jobs

and my main aim is to give scwcd 6

till date have not received the certificate from the oracle or pearsonvue

[Rahul Sudip Bose]

sagar kumar nerella wrote:this is sagar i have cleared the ocpjp6 exam thru pearsonvue.com testing site with 73% on jul 8th 2011 is it a good score?

to apply for jobs

and my main aim is to give scwcd 6

till date have not received the certificate from the oracle or pearsonvue

It might create difficulties in the interview. My score is also in the 70's band. I was told that (and i agree with it) if your concepts are strong and if you have hands on experience by contributing to useful projects, then score does not make much of a difference. However, i see that many of the folks in this forum score above 80. Very few people get scores in the 70's.

[sagar kumar nerella]

thanks rahul for the reply

but i want to know with that score can i go for scwcd 6 exam....
whether it's a problem for it or not?

[Ankit Garg]

Your score is not printed on your certificate. I won't say a score in 70s is bad. Passing the exam is good enough, the score doesn't matter that much...

[Rahul Sudip Bose]

sagar kumar nerella wrote:thanks rahul for the reply

but i want to know with that score can i go for scwcd 6 exam....
whether it's a problem for it or not?

only scjp/ocjp pass is needed.

[Deepak Bala]

Any score above the passing score is respectful. No one really asks for your score in an interview, so dont sweat it

[Andreas Svenkson]

Speaking from a former-job-seeking position, I would honestly not have as much respect / will to work for an employer who had asked me what my score was on the interview - to me that's the same as looking at grades you had in the courses you took to get your degree (assuming one has a degree).

I think such a mentality from an employer is overly-theoretic. They should be interested in whether or not you passed and other than that look at potential experience and personality. If I personally had to choose between 2 employers where one of them had asked about my score and the other didn't, I'd definitely take the job at the second one, since it shows that they are interested in more than just "numbers on a piece of paper".

// Andreas

[Bert Bates]

I agree that I'd be skeptical of an interviewer who wants to know the score.

Also, I think that what you tend to see at JavaRanch is only those people who do great. Very few people are brave enough to report when they fail or when their score isn't good.

[Paul Anilprem]

There is only 1% point difference between barely making and not making the passing score. So if it is justified for en employer to give credit for certification, I think it is justified for the employer if they look at the scores as well. In fact, I would say that it is highly probable that interviewers who give weightage to certification, would be impressed by 90%+ scores. The reason is exactly the same as for why they are looking for certification in the first place!

On one hand you want to take credit for certification and on the other, you don't want to be discredited for a low score

Also, I am very skeptical of statements that begin with something like, "I wouldn't work for an employer if...". You know, you work for a company that is made up of hundreds or thousands of people, while you are interviewed by may be 5 of them. Just one interviewer asking you the score score really has little bearing on what kind of employer it is. If you are skeptical of working for a manager who asks for score, then you should be equally skeptical of the manager who asks for certification, IMHO. I wouldn't be skeptical of either.

[Andreas Svenkson]

Paul Anilprem wrote:There is only 1% point difference between barely making and not making the passing score. So if it is justified for en employer to give credit for certification, I think it is justified for the employer if they look at the scores as well. In fact, I would say that it is highly probable that interviewers who give weightage to certification, would be impressed by 90%+ scores. The reason is exactly the same as for why they are looking for certification in the first place!

On one hand you want to take credit for certification and on the other, you don't want to be discredited for a low score

I do see your point, and that of any emplyer who asks for the score, and ofcourse a high scoring % is impressive. But the point im trying to make myself is that it's not just the results on the paper that matter; If you've been called to an interview, they would already know you are certified since you would have provided that information with your credentials when you first applied for the job - taking it one step further and asking for the passing score imho mostly indicates narrow mindedness since there are far more important aspects of your character that should play a bigger part in telling if whether or not you would be a "good investment" for a company.

Paul Anilprem wrote:
Also, I am very skeptical of statements that begin with something like, "I wouldn't work for an employer if...". You know, you work for a company that is made up of hundreds or thousands of people, while you are interviewed by may be 5 of them. Just one interviewer asking you the score score really has little bearing on what kind of employer it is. If you are skeptical of working for a manager who asks for score, then you should be equally skeptical of the manager who asks for certification, IMHO. I wouldn't be skeptical of either.

First of all I didn't say I wouldn't take the job, what I said was I would prioritize it less than another job where I had gotten a better impression from the interviewer (who would potentially be my future boss). Noone likes to be unemployed...
As for your second point, I respectfully disagree. I think asking for a certification is quite different from asking about your passing score. It's a subjective question ofcourse, but I don't consider the two of them equal, and definitely not of equal importance.

// Andreas