Re: Certification value (was Bitwise operators)

[Mike Millson <mgm@atsga.com>]

While I understand that certification in and of itself does not create a
good programmer, it is certainly an excellent start. It shows initiative
and willingness to learn in a structured environment, all great
qualities of a team player.

In my opinion, discouraging someone from getting certified or devaluing
this accomplishment is a form of negative energy that I think is
detrimental to Java.

Mike

On Mon, 2003-02-24 at 10:34, Scott P. Smith wrote:
> I forgot to mention she was certified and proudly stated that several times
> during the interview.
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott P. Smith" <ssmith@scott-smith.com>
> To: <ajug-members@www.ajug.org>
> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 10:26 AM
> Subject: Re: Certification value (was Bitwise operators)
> 
> 
> > 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
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
-- 
Thank you,
Mike Millson
Web Systems Engineer
Sun Certified Programmer for Java2 Platform
----------------------------------------
AableTech Solutions, Inc.
770.414.8834
404.219.3177 cell
770.414.8206 fax
http://www.atsga.com
----------------------------------------