CSWP - Free online to subscription users

I am curious to hear from anyone who has taken the online CSWP test. It is free to subsciption users if you register before December 31st
and take it by jan 31.
I have read a few of the posts on the Solidworks website's forum but would like to hear from more people. It seems as though the example illustrations that yoiu must follow are isometric views with dimensions and that they can be difficult to interpret.
If you have taken advantage of this offer please post your comments. I am sure I am not the only one looking for info on this subject.
~G
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
i took both tests at the end of october for free. passed both tests.
yes, the isometric view is misleading (i believe deliberately).
since the test is progressive (the model builds off the previous question), if you get the first question wrong there is no way to get the remaining questions correct in that group.
kenneth cswa, cswp-core
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
says...

Congratulations! You did very well to pass this exam.
I agree the views were misleading. I don't think it was intentional, just not well implemented. I've seen a much earlier CSWP test with clear orthographic views of the sample part. The test I took had a question with small features on the far side of the part shown in an isometric view that made it damned near impossible to understand the design intent.
The way the instructions were presented was a big problem for me: in a window that couldn't be dragged for size. There were some "arrow" buttons that would reduce the window size, but they also hid the instructions and some dimensions so you couldn't see them without changing the window again. In my opinion the test itself is a real impediment because you have to hide or un-hide or re-size the instruction window or the SW design window to see what the hell is going on.
Anyone who takes this exam should have a dual-monitor setup so the instructions can be moved to the second monitor and don't interfere with the modeling. Another option is to quickly scroll through the questions, while printing screen shots, so you have a paper copy of the instructions that won't get in the way of your work.
My biggest complaint was, as you said, the progressive nature of the questions, where an un-noticed mistake on one question could be penalized over and over again. Most court systems prevent a defendant being tried again for the same offense!
Speaking of being penalized, there were two scores for every exam problem: 0% or 100%. No partial credit, no analysis of the modeling technique, just a simplistic question that required an answer such as mass or coordinates of the center of mass. Easy to score by computer, but I seriously doubt if this evaluates ones ability to use the software in a 'real world' situation. I've never known an employer to require perfection, but these questions have no other outcome: perfection or total failure.
I've been an employee, employer, consultant or business owner for 40 years. Based on my experience, I will never ask a prospective employee or consultant to prove his ability with a CSWP score. It simply doesn't provide results that are meaningful to me.
In the interests of full disclosure, I failed the exam with a score of 85 of a possible 200 points, and a passing score of 150. I wasted a *lot* of time trying to deal with the window obstruction I mentioned. The easy response is to say "he criticizes the exam because he failed". That's understandable and reasonable. But I've designed effective and successful products for these 40 years, using several 3D CAD systems for the past 18 years, SolidWorks for the past 9 years, and I didn't leave a trail of unhappy clients behind me. I simply don't think this exam fairly or accurately evaluates my ability.
I'm going to take the exam again, and I'll damned well pass it, just for the satisfaction of saying I did it. But I won't think I'm a better designer or SW user for having done so.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It's funny you say that Art because I've seen people go through the tutorial and become productive in SW. They certainly won't be building cell phones and they mess up a lot on large assemblies, but the exam doesn't test that kind of smarts either. Sometimes it is hard to say what an exam like this is testing. Is it testing your knowledge of how to pull the levers or how to get things done. Is it after best practice or just being obtuse. I suppose it would be fair to put in some difficult interpretation as long as it was correct and unambiguous as a check to see that the test taker had the background. But as you say, 40 years is hard to argue with and you probably started out with a 4H pencil and lots of contructions which most yununs would be puzzled by..
TOP
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In article <4f9968e8-3342-4365-9a20-

Thanks for the constructive comments, Paul. I was productive with SW from the time I shut down my seat of I-DEAS, so I don't have any problem getting the job out the door. I agree the CSWP doesn't measure design skills, and doesn't claim to. You offered some good possibilities for its purpose, and I suppose the answer lies somewhere in there.
My complaint isn't about the content (although I found it simplistic, repetetive and boring) but rather about the implementation. The documentation was presented in a format that was as user-hostile as anything I've seen, and some of the diagrams were very difficult to interpret. My impression is the test has been reconfigured to make it easy (i.e. cheap) to score by computer, and I think the content has suffered as a result.
I had the chance to take the modeling portion of a several-years-old CSWP a few weeks ago. It had clear, unambiguous printed documentation, and actually tested the ability capture design intent and to use a fair range of modeling skills. I breezed through it and met every one of the scoring criteria.
As far as the "40 years" thing goes, when useful CAD became affordable 20 years ago I embraced the "tube" and dumped the "board". I'd have a lot of trouble interpreting those old drafting constructions today.
Cordially, Art W
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If you read the forums, you know about my attempt (SW crashed and work wasn't saved). I think the isometric views are misleading, but I also think how they are presented is poorly conceived, and the problem descriptions are a bit too sloppy to be called misleading, but rather poorly written.
Matt Lorono http://sw.fcsuper.com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Art,
I agree with much of what you are saying. I would post your statements in the SolidWorks forum too as I know a lot of people will have interest in this top, with the SWW8 coming up fast and all.
Matt Lorono http://sw.fcsuper.com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thanks for the input ...
New question: I followed the instructions to get the exam but there is never any field to enter the PROMO CODE... what gives??? At what point do you actually enter the Promo Code? The last menu I made it to wanted me to confirm the order that would charge to my credit card...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
the free voucher is obtained by email. https://www.solidworks.com/pages/services/subscription/Certification.html
send an email to snipped-for-privacy@solidworks.com with coupon code (middle of page listed above) in subject line. specifiy which test you want.
the free voucher is only available to subscription customers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes - I am Subscription customer.
The website has been fixed. The PROMO CODE field is now back where it is supposed to be.
Thanks.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.