Re: Certification value (was Bitwise operators)

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

Funny story:

While interviewing about 6 months ago, I had a technical interview with a
women who wrote some code on a board and asked:  Would this compile, and if
so would it run?

I answered that it would not compile and explained why.  She said no, it
would compile, but you would get a run time error.  I knew she was wrong.
She went on to explain that this was a question on the Java certification
exam, so she knew this was the correct answer.  I was very adamant that I
was correct.  I wrote the code down in my notebook, and told her I would
check it when I got back home.  By the time I got back home, she had sent me
an email saying I was right and that this would not ADVERSELY affect her
evaluation.  Wow,  I was glad to hear that being correct would not adversely
affect me.

She was a 'Senior' engineer, and this was a follow-up technical interview
held after the less technical first round.


Scott

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Philion" <philion@acmerocket.com>
To: <ajug-members@www.ajug.org>
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: Certification value (was Bitwise operators)


> I'm going to jump in here....
>
> All of my comments are based on direct experience with the rigorous
> certification test development process at Sun. Further, I'm also pretty
> biased.
>
> Scott, you directly mention "Has the correlation ever been
> experimentally measured?" The answer is "Yes!", for every single version
> of each Sun exam. (They are rewritten and retested from scratch every
> few years.)
>
> A bigger question is: What do the tests actually measure? They measure
> different things (the whole point of having several different exams).
> The SCJP exam tests knowledge of J2SE. Nothing more. It does not measure
> how good a programmer you are, or what your work ethic is like, or if
> you can meet a deadline or if you're a good person to have on a
> development team. It simply tests knowledge of basic Java.
>
> The SCJP exam is set up with the following in mind: If you've been a
> Java programmer for a year, you should be able to walk in, sit down and
> pass the exam. If you don't know Java, or you've only been using it
> on-and-off for a little while, you should fail. That's how exam is
> indended and structured.
>
> This goal is acheived using a "beta" process: Hundreds of candidate
> questions are written (on the order of 400 for the SCJP), and then many
> people (who are anywhere from Java experts to completely unaware of
> Java) sit down and take the whole exam (it takes about half a day). Each
> individual question is then scored, based on the following criteria: The
> Java experts got it right and the Java novices got it wrong. (There's a
> whole, complex statistical model behind it, which I won't get into.) Any
> question that does not score well based on these criteria is thrown out.
> The rest are used to put together the actual exam.
>
> Is this a perfect system? No; there are a number of flaws. First, the
> exam is mutiple choice. Second, it is fairly easy to pick up one of the
> study books and use that to pass the exam (because it is mutiple
> choice). Third, people have taken the exam "shared" the answers with
> friends (and the whole internet). These things actually devalue the
> certification process because they allow a person to pass who should not
> pass.
>
> That's why there are many exams, both multiple-choice and practical.
> While the SCJP exam will not answer the question "Can X write good Java
> code?" (and it was never intended to), the combination of the SCJP and
> SCJD exam will answer the question: "Can X use Java to solve a complex,
> real-world problem?"
>
> As for any sort of certification for "job performance", personally I
> think that is at least 80% based on the actual work environment, not the
> potential employee. Some people thrive in high-pressure start-ups,
> others don't. No test can determine that.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> - Paul Philion
>
> Scott P. Smith wrote:
>
> >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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>