Re: Certification value (was Bitwise operators)

["Scott P. Smith" <ssmith@scott-smith.com>]

Please excuse my spelling/typos.  I have dyslexia.  I should have proof read
it better.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott P. Smith" <ssmith@scott-smith.com>
To: <ajug-members@www.ajug.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 8:10 PM
Subject: Re: Certification value (was Bitwise operators)


> I never said it was easy to pass all the various certifications tests.  I
> did not mean to imply that.  I probably wouldn't pass any one of them
today.
> I would have to prepare for it a few weeks.  If I passed, does it make me
a
> better software engineer?
>
> I was commenting on the coloration between on the job performance and
being
> certified.
>
> Has the correlation ever been experimentally measured?  A test is not
valid
> unless it is objectively correlated with the criteria it is attempting to
> measure.  We take SATs to enter collage because the score on the SAT
> correlates highly with performance in collage.  (Of course it's not
> perfect.)
>
> What you are tested for when you take the SCJP is performance on the SCJP.
> Extrapolating that to above average work performance is not necessarily
> valid.  Maybe it is.  I have a subjective opinion that I can't back up
with
> proof.  Unless it's backed up be evidence, It's a matter of faith.  Either
> you believe in it or you don't.  Maybe there is proof.  But don't quote a
> study paid for by Sun.  They are not objective.  Is Gosling certified?  I
> have no idea.  If he is, did he actually sit down and take the tests.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Curt Smith" <chsmith@speakeasy.net>
> To: <ajug-members@www.ajug.org>
> Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 5:30 PM
> Subject: Re: Certification value (was Bitwise operators)
>
>
> > My incompetence at subtle sarcasm in my post below caused at least a few
> > folks to misunderstand that I was actually attempting (poorly) to
advocate
> > certification.   SCJP though would not be my suggested end point, rather
> > SCWCD plus SCEA.   After passing both and many others, I found the
> > design of SCWCD to be an excellent test of ones knowledge of JSP,
Servlet,
> > taglib, web.xml etc.  Modern trick question design of multiple choice
> _can_
> > be tough and rigorous.  Take the SCWCD if you think it's so easy and of
no
> > value.  :)
> >
> > Appologies,  curt
> >
> > Curt Smith wrote:
> >
> > >>
> > >>> I will probably offend many people by saying this, but I place no
> > >>> value in
> > >>> being certified.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > I agree regarding SCJP.   Referring to beyond SCJP, analogously I'm
> > > glad the
> > > American Medical Assoc. doesn't feel that getting a BS in biology is
> > > sufficient
> > > to be an effective brain surgeon, there is also more to learn and is
> > > of essential
> > > value including and even beyond SCWCD, SCEA, IBM XML , , ,
> > >
> > > curt
> > >
> > >>>
> > >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Curt Smith
> > chsmith@speakeasy.net
> > (h) 404-294-6686
> > (w) 404-463-0973
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>