[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Certification value (was Bitwise operators)
I have been doing C++ for over 10 years and feel the same about C++
certifications.
But if I really wanted a job that demanded certification, I WOULD get
certified. So I don't mean to be too harsh. You have to play the game.
Scott
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Millson" <mgm@atsga.com>
To: "Ajug-Members" <ajug-members@www.ajug.org>
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 10:51 AM
Subject: Re: Certification value (was Bitwise operators)
> 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
> ----------------------------------------
>
>