March 29, 2010 at 6:09 pm
Gift Peddie (3/29/2010)
I met your requirements and am still waiting for the discussion.
I would like you to tell me how you can improve an advanced credential that excludes Buick and Chevrolet employees who are displaced that are highly skilled men and women who built America. I was in the suburb of Buick city I had to drive one hour to take the standard exams so who and how will you include the highly skilled that needs training in Saginaw, Baycity, Flint in Michigan and Fort Wayne and surrounding area in Indiana. There is no PASS and who are their peers? Please tell me because I would like to know how to improve a credential that excludes about 50,000 highly skilled displaced men and women in just two states.
So all peers must be MCITP no weaver, If it is a minority fifty percent of the peers must be of minority. If a candidate fails the corrected project must be public so I can test it. I can create ten version of the project posted and in all RDBMS. There is no altruism in commerce so all reviewers must be MCITP in all areas, so I will have to take the T-SQL exams and everybody will take the BI exams.
Okay, so let me get this straight. We have 50,000 displaced Buick and Chevrolet employees. All of them want to become Microsoft Certified professionals, correct? Personally, I don't see that. Some of them may actually want to get into the IT career field, but I seriously doubt if all 50,000 of them do.
In addition, if that is what they want to do, the MCITP is the first stop on the road. Remember, just like the MCM requires that you already have the MCITP, we also were stating the same for the MCJ. Guess what, I'm helping to put together a certification that I couldn't even attain until I get my MCITP.
Here's what I see. A well developed mid-level certification that business sees as valuable, is not as easily attained as the MCITP, but much more available than the MCM. People see the value in that certification, work towards it by first getting their MCITP (money in Microsofts pocket), then continue working to achieve the MCJ (money in someone elses pocket, MS or PASS), and by doing so actually have to demonstrate actually knowledge and its application. Not at a master level, but a journeyman's level. A level that I feel I fill already. I know a lot about MS SQL Server. I know there is a lot more that I don't know but could learn. I also have knowledge of areas that I have not had to support, but at least understand how it works. a journeyman. Put me in a situation where I have to support it (clustering, transactional replication, etc) and I will learn what I need to know to succeed.
If such a certification were available, yes, I would definately look much more seriously at the MCITP's first. Then I would continue to work on attaining the MCJ.
There are others that would probably pass, as we have seen amny people here on SSC state, they aren't certified yet that doesn't hold them back either.
The biggest part is getting busness to realize that certifications (and degress, except maybe in some areas) aren't everything. If that is all they look at then they are missing the boat on a lot of great professionals out there that could do the job they need and even more.
March 29, 2010 at 6:13 pm
Lynn Pettis (3/29/2010)
We would be interested in hearing your suggestons to address those concerns. To be honest, I think we are trying to put together something that fits between MCITP and MCM and would represent something that truely indicates that the bearer has reasonable knowledge and experience with MS SQL Server.
That's kind of the point that I've been trying to make without coming right out and saying it. Would you say that a person who is the "bearer" of a PHD in Mathematics "has a reasonable knowledge and experience" with Mathematics? If so, would you consider a simple number conversion like I asked that one fellow to be "reasonable knowledge"? I can guarantee that a PHD went through many "peer reviews".
There will always be accolades that have the supposed promise that the bearer of such an accolade has a "reasonable knowledge" of some given area. As honorable as the intentions are behind the proposed accolade of MCJ, it will be no more of a guarantee of actual knowledge than the current certs are or that of a PHD in Mathematics even with peer reviews. There is a way to beat every system and every poser, liar, and ring-knocker in the world knows how to do it.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 29, 2010 at 6:25 pm
Jeff Moden (3/29/2010)
Lynn Pettis (3/29/2010)
We would be interested in hearing your suggestons to address those concerns. To be honest, I think we are trying to put together something that fits between MCITP and MCM and would represent something that truely indicates that the bearer has reasonable knowledge and experience with MS SQL Server.That's kind of the point that I've been trying to make without coming right out and saying it. Would you say that a person who is the "bearer" of a PHD in Mathematics "has a reasonable knowledge and experience" with Mathematics? If so, would you consider a simple number conversion like I asked that one fellow to be "reasonable knowledge"? I can guarantee that a PHD went through many "peer reviews".
There will always be accolades that have the supposed promise that the bearer of such an accolade has a "reasonable knowledge" of some given area. As honorable as the intentions are behind the proposed accolade of MCJ, it will be no more of a guarantee of actual knowledge than the current certs are or that of a PHD in Mathematics even with peer reviews. There is a way to beat every system and every poser, liar, and ring-knocker in the world knows how to do it.
Yes - agreed. Posers will find a way to circumvent the system. I would hope they would be far fewer than could circumvent the system for the MCITP. On the other hand, if they are able to beat the system - at least they set a goal and achieved it.
I think that it has to be accepted that some will figure out how to cheat the system and live with that number. Creating bigger barriers is counterproductive. I don't see the MCJ as a barrier to entry in our club though. I see the MCM as being a good ol' boy barrier to entry - as it is currently made. However, I see plenty of valid reasons for it being that way - though I know one of the MCM's and frankly am surprised that he did it.
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
March 29, 2010 at 6:36 pm
CirquedeSQLeil (3/29/2010)
Jeff Moden (3/29/2010)
Lynn Pettis (3/29/2010)
We would be interested in hearing your suggestons to address those concerns. To be honest, I think we are trying to put together something that fits between MCITP and MCM and would represent something that truely indicates that the bearer has reasonable knowledge and experience with MS SQL Server.That's kind of the point that I've been trying to make without coming right out and saying it. Would you say that a person who is the "bearer" of a PHD in Mathematics "has a reasonable knowledge and experience" with Mathematics? If so, would you consider a simple number conversion like I asked that one fellow to be "reasonable knowledge"? I can guarantee that a PHD went through many "peer reviews".
There will always be accolades that have the supposed promise that the bearer of such an accolade has a "reasonable knowledge" of some given area. As honorable as the intentions are behind the proposed accolade of MCJ, it will be no more of a guarantee of actual knowledge than the current certs are or that of a PHD in Mathematics even with peer reviews. There is a way to beat every system and every poser, liar, and ring-knocker in the world knows how to do it.
Yes - agreed. Posers will find a way to circumvent the system. I would hope they would be far fewer than could circumvent the system for the MCITP. On the other hand, if they are able to beat the system - at least they set a goal and achieved it.
I think that it has to be accepted that some will figure out how to cheat the system and live with that number. Creating bigger barriers is counterproductive. I don't see the MCJ as a barrier to entry in our club though. I see the MCM as being a good ol' boy barrier to entry - as it is currently made. However, I see plenty of valid reasons for it being that way - though I know one of the MCM's and frankly am surprised that he did it.
Jeff would very much like to hear more on the 'valid reasons' as you see them. To me what I'd like to know is just a realistic scenario of cost vs payoffs for the MCM. Something better than saying
'your consulting rates will double....' . From what I am reading on Brent O's blog it seems a great program for the SQL enthusiast but am just not sure what the payoffs would be and if being business savvy is part of the deal. Even sitting in a class with the kind of teachers like Paul and Adam can help a person learn a whole lot regardless of whether you pass or not (I think).
March 29, 2010 at 6:38 pm
Somebody was asking about statistics on certs...this is from Greg Low's blog, about a year ago, the counts are across the world.
MCDBA SQL 2000 152086
MCTS SQL 2005 41665
SQL 2005 BI 2600
SQL 2008 Dev 336
SQL 2008 BI 134
MCITP SQL 2005 DBA 6695
SQL 2005 Dev 2925
SQL 2005 BI 1088
SQL 2008 DBA 92
SQL 2008 BI 50
MCM SQL 2005 18
SQL 2008 2
March 29, 2010 at 6:41 pm
Jeff Moden (3/29/2010)
Lynn Pettis (3/29/2010)
We would be interested in hearing your suggestons to address those concerns. To be honest, I think we are trying to put together something that fits between MCITP and MCM and would represent something that truely indicates that the bearer has reasonable knowledge and experience with MS SQL Server.That's kind of the point that I've been trying to make without coming right out and saying it. Would you say that a person who is the "bearer" of a PHD in Mathematics "has a reasonable knowledge and experience" with Mathematics? If so, would you consider a simple number conversion like I asked that one fellow to be "reasonable knowledge"? I can guarantee that a PHD went through many "peer reviews".
There will always be accolades that have the supposed promise that the bearer of such an accolade has a "reasonable knowledge" of some given area. As honorable as the intentions are behind the proposed accolade of MCJ, it will be no more of a guarantee of actual knowledge than the current certs are or that of a PHD in Mathematics even with peer reviews. There is a way to beat every system and every poser, liar, and ring-knocker in the world knows how to do it.
So, are you saying that we should all just forget degrees and certs? That the time and effort I put into earning my BS and MA degrees was just a waste of my time and money? I don't think it was, it gave me a base, a frame work with which to build upon as I progressed through my career.
There was a time I needed to be able to translate octal into decimal t decipher error codes. Could I still do it now, probably but I might need a pencil and some paper. Could I do it the other way, again probably with the help of pencil and paper. Ask me to do it off the top of my head, I'd tell you I either need pencil and paper or calculator (and of course even the calculator in Windows will do it for you for binary, octal, decimal, and hexadecimal).
Talk about gaming a system, I knew and individual at UCCS that would drop a course before the drop deadline if he wasn't getting an A. He was gaming the system to earn a 4.0 average. Your right, there are people like that out there, and no, we aren't going to be able to stop them. But it would be nice if we could come up with an advacned cert that for the majority of people would be valuable, and demonstrate to others their knowledge and abilities to apply that knowledge. One reason I would see this cert requiring recertification over a period of time. I have to recertify annually as a USSF and High School Soccer Official. Perhaps the MCJ would have a three or five year time frame. Perhaps like TDWI's certification, part of that could be done by doing presentations at user group meetings or conferences, or writing articles or books, or by teaching classes, or attending educational courses or conferences. I'd even say that the virtual conferences that are becoming popular would work here as well.
There is a lot more to dicuss, to hash out, to figure out what may or may not work.
March 29, 2010 at 7:07 pm
CirquedeSQLeil (3/29/2010)
If they can hack their way to the top, why couldn't they put in the time to get a degree?
Heh... because they don't want to be like that PHD in Mathematics I spoke of that still didn't know how to do a simple numbering system conversion. 😉 Same goes with certs.
When is the last time you applied for a job that said no experience required? Most Sr. Level jobs I see available require a minimum of 5 years experience.
Absolutely true and I wish I could help companies get over such an artificial filter. That's really all it is is a filter to keep the numbers of resumes they get down to a "managable level". What's the difference between an absolute Ninja in T-SQL with only 3 years "experience" compared to an every day joe-bag-o-donuts who's just been doing his time for the last 5 years. The answer is... opportunity missed on the part of the company because of such artificial requirements.
What do we say to the employer that requires us to be employed for a year before applying for a promotion? What about the employer that requires us to be employed for a year before we enroll in 401k or before we can get a pay raise?
Heh... unless I really like the job... Bye! 😛 Just kidding. My question would be what do such company "loyalty" requirements have to with with skill and why does anyone think you need 3 to 5 years to aquire such skill? How about the 10 year olds (you've seen them on TV now and then) that are smarter than most PHD's? I think that anyone going for the proposed MCJ should be able to do so with no time restrictions especially since there's a peer review.
My point is that MCJ could be a very good idea or a very bad idea. Requiring time in service does not guarantee supposed "experience" and certainly doesn't guarantee ability. My suggestion is that TIS be dropped from the proposed requirements of MCJ.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 29, 2010 at 7:14 pm
Jeff Moden (3/29/2010)
CirquedeSQLeil (3/29/2010)
If they can hack their way to the top, why couldn't they put in the time to get a degree?Heh... because they don't want to be like that PHD in Mathematics I spoke of that still didn't know how to do a simple numbering system conversion. 😉 Same goes with certs.
When is the last time you applied for a job that said no experience required? Most Sr. Level jobs I see available require a minimum of 5 years experience.
Absolutely true and I wish I could help companies get over such an artificial filter. That's really all it is is a filter to keep the numbers of resumes they get down to a "managable level". What's the difference between an absolute Ninja in T-SQL with only 3 years "experience" compared to an every day joe-bag-o-donuts who's just been doing his time for the last 5 years. The answer is... opportunity missed on the part of the company because of such artificial requirements.
What do we say to the employer that requires us to be employed for a year before applying for a promotion? What about the employer that requires us to be employed for a year before we enroll in 401k or before we can get a pay raise?
Heh... unless I really like the job... Bye! 😛 Just kidding. My question would be what do such company "loyalty" requirements have to with with skill and why does anyone think you need 3 to 5 years to aquire such skill? How about the 10 year olds (you've seen them on TV now and then) that are smarter than most PHD's? I think that anyone going for the proposed MCJ should be able to do so with no time restrictions especially since there's a peer review.
My point is that MCJ could be a very good idea or a very bad idea. Requiring time in service does not guarantee supposed "experience" and certainly doesn't guarantee ability. My suggestion is that TIS be dropped from the proposed requirements of MCJ.
I don't have a problem with dropping the time in service. Remember this was just one idea and was partly based on the five year requirement mentioned for the MCM.
Would you also dropping the requirement that anyone seeking the MCJ not have to have an MCITP, as that was also a requirement suggested, iirc.
March 29, 2010 at 7:16 pm
Lynn Pettis (3/29/2010)
So, are you saying that we should all just forget degrees and certs? That the time and effort I put into earning my BS and MA degrees was just a waste of my time and money? I don't think it was, it gave me a base, a frame work with which to build upon as I progressed through my career.
Absolutely not... I don't believe it was a waste of your time or money at all. It did give you a good basis. But not all people have taken the time to actually learn what they have been taught and that's why I wouldn't put a "degreed" resume over someone's who had no such degree. When I'm hiring, a degree means nothing to me until a person proves that it did some good during the interview and that they actually have the ability to do what I need to have done.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 29, 2010 at 7:23 pm
Lynn Pettis (3/29/2010)
Would you also dropping the requirement that anyone seeking the MCJ not have to have an MCITP, as that was also a requirement suggested, iirc.
That's a really good question, Lynn. A couple of considerations there... first, what would an MCITP add to the MCJ other than TIS? Second, what's the purpose of MCJ? If it's to ultimately demonstrate that a person has "ability", is there actually a need for the MCITP prerequisite? I mean are you going to not test a person on MCITP things if they have the MCITP? I would think not.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 29, 2010 at 7:26 pm
dma-669038 (3/29/2010)
Somebody was asking about statistics on certs...this is from Greg Low's blog, about a year ago, the counts are across the world.MCDBA SQL 2000 152086
MCTS SQL 2005 41665
SQL 2005 BI 2600
SQL 2008 Dev 336
SQL 2008 BI 134
MCITP SQL 2005 DBA 6695
SQL 2005 Dev 2925
SQL 2005 BI 1088
SQL 2008 DBA 92
SQL 2008 BI 50
MCM SQL 2005 18
SQL 2008 2
Heh... now compare that with the number of people who hold positions in areas greater than SQL Server 2000.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 29, 2010 at 7:26 pm
Again, the credential does not exclude somebody who is willing to be in the industry.
That may not be true for people with kids and other responsibilities.
As for exclusion, how can you speak to that when you yourself are trying to exclude every member of the SQL community who is not certified? Isn't that a double standard
I started asking for credentials because all I want is to keep the doors open so it just occurred to me to force the doors and keep them open with my credentials. The reason Microsoft makes engineering easy in some cases almost pedestrian so please keep the doors open. That is what Steve and his friends started and the new owner RedGate and Steve continue to do.
How can you certify somebody who does not want to be certified? What are the current statistics of certification across all populations of ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion and creed? Ethnicity and Gender have no bearing on certification. If you want to be certified that is your choice and your choice alone
It does because the standard exams do not ask any personal questions so it does not know who is taking the exam. The standard tests are like a blind test but when there is peer will review, who are the peers? There was a design question on MSDN, the user was told to go away in not so many words by one of the people in charge but I can design that system in one hour. That makes who is a peer to whom very a subjective issue.
All I want is please leave the doors open to all with the ability.
Kind regards,
Gift Peddie
March 29, 2010 at 7:29 pm
CirquedeSQLeil (3/29/2010)
Jeff Moden (3/29/2010)
Grant Fritchey (3/29/2010)
First, I'm not crazy about a lot of the suggested directions for a middle-level certification that have been put forward so far. It's not that any of the ideas are bad, but accumulatively it looks too much like we're unionizing the position with the time in rate requirements, the peer review board and other things. I'm sure it's reflective of how I came into the industry, but I don't want to see us eliminate the possibility of people to simply hack their way to the top without certs, degrees or time in rate.The world of data processing, be it in databases or the world of GUI's, is the last frontier where a motivated self-studying individual can actually "hack their way to the top without certs, degrees or time in rate". Let's be careful not to turn that world into an exclusive club. There are already enough companies that require a Bachelors Degree to be a filing clerk. 😀
If they can hack their way to the top, why couldn't they put in the time to get a degree?
Because I was busy doing other stuff and I just kind of stumbled my way into IT because I had a tiny bit of talent and a prediliction. Once I was in, doing the work, receiving a salary, growing (I hope) in ability, it seemed to late to run back to school to get the CompSci degree so that I was a valid IT pro. I've now got 20+ years in the business. It really seems like a bigger waste of time than it did 10 or 15 years ago. That's one reason.
We aren't trying to eliminate people, and wouldn't be doing any more so than the current requirements imposed by some employers that you must have time in service, a degree, a certification, or know somebody really well. I think many of us have already run into that door several times. When is the last time you applied for a job that said no experience required? Most Sr. Level jobs I see available require a minimum of 5 years experience. Thus if you are a Jr without the five years - you're only going up if there is a spot open on your team and you have proved your stuff internally and the manager likes you.
If you are a Jr and looking to move to a different company, having done two years service already - why not get a certification that doesn't hurt you more than it could help?
Many of us are goal setters. That is how people crawl to the top of the heap - they set goals. This would be one more goal. If I start down the career path and blow money on a cert and then find out it isn't for me - I have lost money and study time. If I start down a path and decide I don't like it but don't get certified because the next certification is at MCJ - then I haven't lost that money.
I think the MCJ will do a lot less to keep people out than it would to enhance our field. The MCM is more likely to impose restrictions than the MCJ.
What do we say to the employer that requires us to be employed for a year before applying for a promotion? What about the employer that requires us to be employed for a year before we enroll in 401k or before we can get a pay raise?
And yet all these are different examples than a self-selected certification. I'm still put-off by time-in-rate requirements for an abilities and knowledge test and I say that having the time in rate.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
March 29, 2010 at 7:33 pm
dma-669038 (3/29/2010)
CirquedeSQLeil (3/29/2010)
Jeff Moden (3/29/2010)
Lynn Pettis (3/29/2010)
We would be interested in hearing your suggestons to address those concerns. To be honest, I think we are trying to put together something that fits between MCITP and MCM and would represent something that truely indicates that the bearer has reasonable knowledge and experience with MS SQL Server.That's kind of the point that I've been trying to make without coming right out and saying it. Would you say that a person who is the "bearer" of a PHD in Mathematics "has a reasonable knowledge and experience" with Mathematics? If so, would you consider a simple number conversion like I asked that one fellow to be "reasonable knowledge"? I can guarantee that a PHD went through many "peer reviews".
There will always be accolades that have the supposed promise that the bearer of such an accolade has a "reasonable knowledge" of some given area. As honorable as the intentions are behind the proposed accolade of MCJ, it will be no more of a guarantee of actual knowledge than the current certs are or that of a PHD in Mathematics even with peer reviews. There is a way to beat every system and every poser, liar, and ring-knocker in the world knows how to do it.
Yes - agreed. Posers will find a way to circumvent the system. I would hope they would be far fewer than could circumvent the system for the MCITP. On the other hand, if they are able to beat the system - at least they set a goal and achieved it.
I think that it has to be accepted that some will figure out how to cheat the system and live with that number. Creating bigger barriers is counterproductive. I don't see the MCJ as a barrier to entry in our club though. I see the MCM as being a good ol' boy barrier to entry - as it is currently made. However, I see plenty of valid reasons for it being that way - though I know one of the MCM's and frankly am surprised that he did it.
Jeff would very much like to hear more on the 'valid reasons' as you see them. To me what I'd like to know is just a realistic scenario of cost vs payoffs for the MCM. Something better than saying
'your consulting rates will double....' . From what I am reading on Brent O's blog it seems a great program for the SQL enthusiast but am just not sure what the payoffs would be and if being business savvy is part of the deal. Even sitting in a class with the kind of teachers like Paul and Adam can help a person learn a whole lot regardless of whether you pass or not (I think).
I believe you should be addressing Jason on the subject of 'valid reasons' as he see's them. I wrote nothing of 'valid reasons'. See the quote trace above... I can see why you thought it may have been me but it was not. 🙂
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
March 29, 2010 at 7:36 pm
dma-669038 (3/29/2010)
I think I agree whole heartedly with this..and am not sure how many of you have seen the 'other side' of the picture, a whole lot of DBAs/programmers who know *some basics*, find their way into jobs and *stay put* until they are forced into a situation perhaps a Buick like situation where they have to move or learn more. I know atleast 3 organisations where I have seen people like this, people who are constantly cynical about learning, think it is 'boring stuff that geeks do' and yet want to and able to keep jobs and do the bare minimal from googling or other mundane ways. While a forced degre or cert closes the doors for many it imposes some discipline on others like this and somewhat evens out the playing ground for those of us who are more naturally inclined to learn. Yeah it is kinda easy to say if you are not interested you shouuld not be in the job/profession at all but that is hardly the way it is and many of us have to contend and compete with people far less hard working/motivated and yet get by by other means.
Right there with you. I work at a large insurance company about about half my team qualifies under your description. They learn what they're forced to and not much else. Unfortunately, partly because it's a large company, partly because it's the company that it is, they'll be there, probably long after I'm gone, doing the same job with as minimal work as possible.
For what it's worth, several of them have CompSci degrees and a few of them have certs from other organizations on other technologies (something to do with that chick at Delphi), but I wouldn't personally hold them up as poster children for the worth and value of degrees and certifications.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
Viewing 15 posts - 331 through 345 (of 685 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply