April 5, 2010 at 9:18 pm
Steve Jones - Editor (4/5/2010)
I would like to see it broken down, even further than just 3 general areas. I think there is value in proving T-SQL skills alone. Probably value in overall administration of a server, value in proving skills with HA, a few more. I know plenty of people that spend their career without doing replication. Some do it regularly.As a first cut, however, to limit the issues, I'd start with 3 or 4. I'd do a T-SQL one, and maybe slip that under the developer category. I'd do admin, and then perhaps 2 in the BI space focused on SSIS and SSRS.
I'd go with:
MCJ-Developer
MCJ-Database Administrator
MCJ-Business Intelligence (BI)
Where would we throw SSAS? It kinda falls into BI, but I can see people specializing in SSIS/SSRS without using SSAS.
Wayne
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008
Author - SQL Server T-SQL Recipes
April 5, 2010 at 9:21 pm
I think SSAS needs it's own exam, actually 2. An admin an an MDX/Designer/developer one.
April 5, 2010 at 9:27 pm
I really see T-SQL as a core competency for both DBAs and Developers.
I agree that some people may never work in a replication, or log-shipping, or database mirroring, or clustered environment. Until I actually implemented database mirroring where I work I fell into all those categories.
That's where a project presentation would come into play. Even if it is a lab type of environment, if someone can demonstrate how one would setup a cluster (2-node), or database mirroring, or replication, or log-shipping, and can discuss the issues that are solved by the solution, the limitations of the solutions, problems encountered and how they were resolved, then it shows knowledge and its application.
The testing would cover these areas as well, and would (should) do it to a deeper level of understanding than the current MCITP tests. This too would, perhaps, require an individual to setup a sandbox where (s)he could work on this various areas to can practical knowledge and some experience such that they understand the concepts beyond mere book learning.
April 5, 2010 at 9:45 pm
I like the idea of not having a lot of tracks that correlate well with the MCM and MCITP.
I also like the ability to provide specialization in key areas. What if the MCJ had two core tracks with required exams each. Then you would also have to fulfill two or three optional exams as well. This would be similar to the MCSE and MCSE+I back in the day, but with a lot more depth.
Another departure from those certs would be that you are still an MCJ without the optional exams (maybe) but could take them and add an emphasis to your certification.
One could be any of the following or combination of the following.
MCJ
MCJ with an emphasis in Replication
MCJ with an emphasis in CLR
MCJ BI with an emphasis in SSAS
etc.
This is much like certain bachelor programs are conducted.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
April 6, 2010 at 2:43 pm
CirquedeSQLeil (4/5/2010)
I like the idea of not having a lot of tracks that correlate well with the MCM and MCITP.I also like the ability to provide specialization in key areas. What if the MCJ had two core tracks with required exams each. Then you would also have to fulfill two or three optional exams as well. This would be similar to the MCSE and MCSE+I back in the day, but with a lot more depth.
Another departure from those certs would be that you are still an MCJ without the optional exams (maybe) but could take them and add an emphasis to your certification.
One could be any of the following or combination of the following.
MCJ
MCJ with an emphasis in Replication
MCJ with an emphasis in CLR
MCJ BI with an emphasis in SSAS
etc.
This is much like certain bachelor programs are conducted.
I like this idea (optional exams add an emphasis). Question is, would only an additional test/exam be required, or would it need the lab/board also?
Wayne
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008
Author - SQL Server T-SQL Recipes
April 6, 2010 at 2:59 pm
WayneS (4/6/2010)
CirquedeSQLeil (4/5/2010)
I like the idea of not having a lot of tracks that correlate well with the MCM and MCITP.I also like the ability to provide specialization in key areas. What if the MCJ had two core tracks with required exams each. Then you would also have to fulfill two or three optional exams as well. This would be similar to the MCSE and MCSE+I back in the day, but with a lot more depth.
Another departure from those certs would be that you are still an MCJ without the optional exams (maybe) but could take them and add an emphasis to your certification.
One could be any of the following or combination of the following.
MCJ
MCJ with an emphasis in Replication
MCJ with an emphasis in CLR
MCJ BI with an emphasis in SSAS
etc.
This is much like certain bachelor programs are conducted.
I like this idea (optional exams add an emphasis). Question is, would only an additional test/exam be required, or would it need the lab/board also?
I hadn't considered that. Maybe that is just handled as a part of the renewal process. The board reviews your exams during renewal and questions you concerning the new exams.
I could make a case for it needing to be both the board and an exam. Without a board review, it makes it easier to game those emphasis certs.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
April 6, 2010 at 3:28 pm
If you're going to have specializations, then a lab/board review should be part of acquiring the MCJ for that specialization. Makes sense to me that if you've got the cert saying you're specialized in a certain field that you have demonstrated your competence in it to the satisifaction of the certifying board, whether that is PASS, Microsoft or the PASS Chapters or whoever. A lab and/or board review of some sort seems to be the way to show said competence. Tests for just knowledge can always be gamed, especially if someone breaks the NDA and publishes the answers somewhere.
Memorizing the answers to the questions does not lead to understanding. Labs would test understanding and as such would be more likely to catch the people who are trying to game the system (and thus lessen the impact of having the certification). As seen on the forums, people who have gamed the system to get the certificate, while they can spout off some amazing stuff, can't actually DO the job. Labs seem to be a good place to catch those people.
If you have the labs given every quarter for certification, you would probably have enough time to work out another lab that has a few different points to catch out the ones are trying to game the system.
A thought occured to me, since labs seem to be a good place to catch people out, there should probably be a general lab for the MCJ. Perhaps there should be a series of small labs, like a problem on query tuning, another on restoring a database, another on indexing, another on normalization of data, one on database design, perhaps another on database refactoring or whatever (just ideas off the top of my head to test whether or not you know SQL Sever) and the person taking the exam has to do 7 out of the 10 labs or something, with doing all of them giving extra credit or something.
The suggestion of 7 out of 10 and extra credit for the others comes from not everyone knowing all aspects of SQL Server. The developer isn't necessarily going to know how to restore a database (that's what admins are for!) and the admin isn't going to necessarily know something that is developer specific. But if you are going to lump Developer/Admin into one certificate, I think you'll have to allow for some diversity in spheres of knowledge when testing.
Of course, the specialization certificates would really cover their specialization and have the appropriate lab work required.
-- Kit
April 6, 2010 at 3:59 pm
I'm with Kit. I think a lab/exam for each emphasis.
Definitely some good work to be done there.
April 6, 2010 at 4:07 pm
Kit G (4/6/2010)
Perhaps there should be a series of small labs, like a problem on query tuning, another on restoring a database, another on indexing, another on normalization of data, one on database design, perhaps another on database refactoring or whatever (just ideas off the top of my head to test whether or not you know SQL Sever) and the person taking the exam has to do 7 out of the 10 labs or something, with doing all of them giving extra credit or something.
I think this fits with what we were envisioning on the labs. There should be a series of tasks that needed to be completed and then you would be graded on the overall performance. I agree that there needs to be tasks covering several domains.
In the MCM, the candidate is given business requirements and then must interpret them and provide a solution. The requirements cover a wide range of tasks that must be accomplished (not necessarily completed but at least good direction shown on the task).
I think the same kind of principles could apply to the MCJ - but need to be done at a lower level than the MCM. I don't believe a set of business requirements necessarily need to be translated and you build your project inside of 6 hours. I do think that some level of competence needs to be shown with each task and then it would behoove one to document the reasoning for doing x rather than y kind of thing.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
April 6, 2010 at 7:48 pm
CirquedeSQLeil (4/6/2010)
Kit G (4/6/2010)
Perhaps there should be a series of small labs, like a problem on query tuning, another on restoring a database, another on indexing, another on normalization of data, one on database design, perhaps another on database refactoring or whatever (just ideas off the top of my head to test whether or not you know SQL Sever) and the person taking the exam has to do 7 out of the 10 labs or something, with doing all of them giving extra credit or something.I think this fits with what we were envisioning on the labs. There should be a series of tasks that needed to be completed and then you would be graded on the overall performance. I agree that there needs to be tasks covering several domains.
In the MCM, the candidate is given business requirements and then must interpret them and provide a solution. The requirements cover a wide range of tasks that must be accomplished (not necessarily completed but at least good direction shown on the task).
I think the same kind of principles could apply to the MCJ - but need to be done at a lower level than the MCM. I don't believe a set of business requirements necessarily need to be translated and you build your project inside of 6 hours. I do think that some level of competence needs to be shown with each task and then it would behoove one to document the reasoning for doing x rather than y kind of thing.
I think that any lab should be quite open ended given this and be based around some requirement. For example:
You have serverA used for OLTP and a serverB for reporting. You want to be able to provide reporting functionality serverB for tables x,y,z that are hosted on serverA. You want to provide the minimum amount of latency in the data being available on serverB for querying. What methods would you use to provide this data? Explain your reasons. Implement your solution.
Now bear in mind that as you are looking at a higher level candidate that you can throw small gotchas in there like one of the tables not having a primary key.
Something I've not seen mentioned but really should be kept in mind with this is that cost should really not be a barrier to entry. The huge cost of an MCM is very prohibitive and I wonder if there are more than qualified candidates out there who just can't afford it or persuade their employers to front the cost and time off.
April 6, 2010 at 8:07 pm
I have cleaned up the survey link per feedback.
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/HLR8V5S[/url]
There is no provision for any extra verbage/introduction on top, or to share survey results with others either ( can only download).
Please make sure you give an intro to whomever it is sent to. I plan to say to my user group and to other UG leads I know that it is an informal means of gathering ideas from some of us who happened to discuss this on SSC.com. I will also direct them to this discussion link if they want to share more ideas.
I am thinking perhaps it will take a month or so to get some substantial feedback. Will post results then but please email me if anyone wants to know before.
Thanks to everyone who helped put it together.
Malathi
April 6, 2010 at 8:39 pm
dma-669038 (4/6/2010)
I have cleaned up the survey link per feedback.http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/HLR8V5S
There is no provision for any extra verbage/introduction on top, or to share survey results with others either ( can only download).
Please make sure you give an intro to whomever it is sent to. I plan to say to my user group and to other UG leads I know that it is an informal means of gathering ideas from some of us who happened to discuss this on SSC.com. I will also direct them to this discussion link if they want to share more ideas.
I am thinking perhaps it will take a month or so to get some substantial feedback. Will post results then but please email me if anyone wants to know before.
Thanks to everyone who helped put it together.
Malathi
Thanks for doing that.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
April 6, 2010 at 9:35 pm
CirquedeSQLeil (4/6/2010)
I could make a case for it needing to be both the board and an exam. Without a board review, it makes it easier to game those emphasis certs.
Exactly. And since we want this to be a cert that is reputable, it seems to imply the board would be necessary.
Wayne
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008
Author - SQL Server T-SQL Recipes
April 6, 2010 at 9:46 pm
Nicholas Cain (4/6/2010)
Something I've not seen mentioned but really should be kept in mind with this is that cost should really not be a barrier to entry. The huge cost of an MCM is very prohibitive and I wonder if there are more than qualified candidates out there who just can't afford it or persuade their employers to front the cost and time off.
We want to keep the cost down. Cost as a barrier wouldn't make this any better than where we are starting. There must be cost associated with it, but it should not be prohibitively high.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
April 6, 2010 at 9:49 pm
WayneS (4/6/2010)
CirquedeSQLeil (4/6/2010)
I could make a case for it needing to be both the board and an exam. Without a board review, it makes it easier to game those emphasis certs.Exactly. And since we want this to be a cert that is reputable, it seems to imply the board would be necessary.
It seems that we have a consensus going with the renewal requiring a board review for the "emphasis" certs.
I too am inclined to think that renewal should simply be a matter of a review board. I think that once you are certified you should be able to maintain it through some sort of continuing education type of credit (like teachers). This would not prohibit new exams for new products. It would also permit you to take that exam if you so wish (for the new product). But once certified, you can maintain it by performing certain tasks and then having a review board approve your certification for another x years.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 312 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply