The Missing Certification

Question

The Missing Certification

Viewing 15 posts - 346 through 360 (of 685 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

Jeff Moden SSC Guru Points: 1004363 More actions · Answer 1

Gift Peddie (3/29/2010)
All I want is please leave the doors open to all [font="Arial Black"]with the ability[/font].

Exactly... 🙂

--Jeff Moden

RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

Helpful Links:
How to post code problems
How to Post Performance Problems
Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

Lynn Pettis SSC Guru Points: 442467 More actions · Answer 2

Gift Peddie (3/29/2010)
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.

I can understand keeping the doors open, but as ideas are presented and discussed, we aren't trying to close the doors. We are simply looking at ideas and trying to determine if they would work or not. Looking for the pros and cons for each, if you will.

With respect, everything you have said during this discussion has been do deny what we are working on as if we were setting everything into stone from the beginning. That is the furthest thing from the truth.

I can't stress enough that this is an ACADEMIC exercise at this time. There is no actual MCJ, there is no certifying board. Perhaps, at some point, what we develop here could be presented to Microsoft or PASS and something real become of it. But thinking that far ahead would cause us to lose sight of what we are trying to accomplish. Realize, that if Microsoft were to take the idea, that things we decide aren't appropriate such as time in service and currently certified MCITP may become a part of the certification, they are in it to make money. What better way than to make MCITP a prerequisite.

One thing that has already been mentioned is perhaps NOT requiring that a candidate for the MCJ be a current MCITP. If we use a peer review, how does that affect who is on the board? Do we still require them to be MCITP's even though that is no longer a requirement?

Another thought, think how far we could be now had you put as much energy into positive ideas, suggestions, and comments as you did with the negative and unsubstantiated comments that you have made through out this discussion.

And yes, positive comments can include those that disagree with a suggestion. It is how you voice your disagreement that makes a difference. It usually includes offer another idea in its place, or describing why it may not be appropriate.

SQLRNNR SSC Guru Points: 281334 More actions · Answer 3

Grant Fritchey (3/29/2010)
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.

That is a good reason. I did the ten year track to get my degree.

The only point I was trying to make was that somebody who, like yourself, can climb to the top (like you have) could do those things without much of a problem.

I just about didn't finish up school but then realized that after the kids started growing there would be no time to do it. I hurried through it so I wouldn't have to worry about it later. Has it made a difference - I believe it has. Is that true for everybody - probably not.

I just think that goal oriented people that can climb to the top can do these types of things if "they want" to.

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

SQLRNNR SSC Guru Points: 281334 More actions · Answer 4

Jeff Moden (3/29/2010)
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. 🙂

I believe she was saying that you would like to hear more of the "valid reasons."

This is completely perception based.

Valid reasons to create a high barrier to entry for the MCM:

1. Prevent people from cheating the system

2. Give a high level of prestige to the program

3. Make the certification credible.

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

Grant Fritchey SSC Guru Points: 398890 More actions · Answer 5

CirquedeSQLeil (3/29/2010)
Grant Fritchey (3/29/2010)
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.
That is a good reason. I did the ten year track to get my degree.
The only point I was trying to make was that somebody who, like yourself, can climb to the top (like you have) could do those things without much of a problem.
I just about didn't finish up school but then realized that after the kids started growing there would be no time to do it. I hurried through it so I wouldn't have to worry about it later. Has it made a difference - I believe it has. Is that true for everybody - probably not.
I just think that goal oriented people that can climb to the top can do these types of things if "they want" to.

Rereading it, that may have come off as defensive. I didn't mean for it to be. I kind of wish I had a degree because I've often thought that I wouldn't mind swapping jobs completely at some point in my life and just go off and teach history. I'd like nothing better than to be given the chance to corrupt the young on a mass scale.

"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

SQLRNNR SSC Guru Points: 281334 More actions · Answer 6

I am willing to remove the time in service from the board. I don't think I would remove the MCITP from the board. I think this pre-req is a representation of the stepping stone certification that the MCJ would represent.

I don't think I could remove the panel review either. I think that would be an essential piece of the puzzle.

Think of the review as having Brent, Jeff, Gail and Paul doing your review. If they signed off on your abilities for the MCJ, I personally think that would be representative enough for the certification. That however should make little bearing in the interview process - just the same as any other cert or degree. If I were your peer and knew that those people approved of your skills along with your exam, then I could give credence to you being an MCJ - you earned it at that point. I think very few people could game a review process when those types of people are performing the review.

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

Lynn Pettis SSC Guru Points: 442467 More actions · Answer 7

Grant Fritchey (3/29/2010)
CirquedeSQLeil (3/29/2010)
Grant Fritchey (3/29/2010)
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.
That is a good reason. I did the ten year track to get my degree.
The only point I was trying to make was that somebody who, like yourself, can climb to the top (like you have) could do those things without much of a problem.
I just about didn't finish up school but then realized that after the kids started growing there would be no time to do it. I hurried through it so I wouldn't have to worry about it later. Has it made a difference - I believe it has. Is that true for everybody - probably not.
I just think that goal oriented people that can climb to the top can do these types of things if "they want" to.
Rereading it, that may have come off as defensive. I didn't mean for it to be. I kind of wish I had a degree because I've often thought that I wouldn't mind swapping jobs completely at some point in my life and just go off and teach history. I'd like nothing better than to be given the chance to corrupt the young on a mass scale.

So what's stopping you? What could be better than father and son (or daughter) sitting down together to work on their homework together.

If I could swing the finances, I'd go for my Doctorate. And for the record, I would be doing it for me, not some check box on an application.

Lynn Pettis SSC Guru Points: 442467 More actions · Answer 8

CirquedeSQLeil (3/29/2010)
I am willing to remove the time in service from the board. I don't think I would remove the MCITP from the board. I think this pre-req is a representation of the stepping stone certification that the MCJ would represent.
I don't think I could remove the panel review either. I think that would be an essential piece of the puzzle.
Think of the review as having Brent, Jeff, Gail and Paul doing your review. If they signed off on your abilities for the MCJ, I personally think that would be representative enough for the certification. That however should make little bearing in the interview process - just the same as any other cert or degree. If I were your peer and knew that those people approved of your skills along with your exam, then I could give credence to you being an MCJ - you earned it at that point. I think very few people could game a review process when those types of people are performing the review.

Restricting the panel to just 4 specific individuals, however, could make getting the cert more difficult. As Grant indicated, this one should be attainable internationally without having to travel to a specific location. Trying to coordinate a review board of those four individuals could be problematic.

I like the idea of the peer review, but I think this one needs to be looked at in greater detail as to how it could be achieved. I think I'd have to go back through the posts to see what ideas had been floated on that, as I think one of them was to use the User Groups as part of the process. I also believe there was mention of video conferencing as well.

dma-669038 SSCrazy Points: 2773 More actions · Answer 9

Has anyone looked at the requirements and process behind Oracle Certified Masters (OCM)? Again i dont know if there are any controversies behind this cert just bringing this up as an example.

The requirements say

Recommended Minimum Skills and Experience

3-4 years of professional enterprise-level Oracle experience

Extensive experience with backup, restore and recovery operations

Proficient with SQL

The program costs about 9K, two labs and two exams and of course previous certs are a pre requisite. There aren't that many people who do it and pass it although no idea of pass percentages and so on. But atleast looks doable compared to MCM.

dma-669038 SSCrazy Points: 2773 More actions · Answer 10

Lynn Pettis (3/29/2010)
CirquedeSQLeil (3/29/2010)
I am willing to remove the time in service from the board. I don't think I would remove the MCITP from the board. I think this pre-req is a representation of the stepping stone certification that the MCJ would represent.
I don't think I could remove the panel review either. I think that would be an essential piece of the puzzle.
Think of the review as having Brent, Jeff, Gail and Paul doing your review. If they signed off on your abilities for the MCJ, I personally think that would be representative enough for the certification. That however should make little bearing in the interview process - just the same as any other cert or degree. If I were your peer and knew that those people approved of your skills along with your exam, then I could give credence to you being an MCJ - you earned it at that point. I think very few people could game a review process when those types of people are performing the review.
Restricting the panel to just 4 specific individuals, however, could make getting the cert more difficult. As Grant indicated, this one should be attainable internationally without having to travel to a specific location. Trying to coordinate a review board of those four individuals could be problematic.
I like the idea of the peer review, but I think this one needs to be looked at in greater detail as to how it could be achieved. I think I'd have to go back through the posts to see what ideas had been floated on that, as I think one of them was to use the User Groups as part of the process. I also believe there was mention of video conferencing as well.

A review may not be possible without travel atleast within the same country. Besides those people have to be paid to sit through the review and if we are hoping PASS or any non MS entity will do it they better come up with a lot of $ 🙂 Some reviews can be done by submitting material and giving reviewers time and this might save some costs but opens doors to cheating as well.

Lynn Pettis SSC Guru Points: 442467 More actions · Answer 11

dma-669038 (3/29/2010)
Has anyone looked at the requirements and process behind Oracle Certified Masters (OCM)? Again i dont know if there are any controversies behind this cert just bringing this up as an example.
The requirements say
Recommended Minimum Skills and Experience
3-4 years of professional enterprise-level Oracle experience
Extensive experience with backup, restore and recovery operations
Proficient with SQL
The program costs about 9K, two labs and two exams and of course previous certs are a pre requisite. There aren't that many people who do it and pass it although no idea of pass percentages and so on. But atleast looks doable compared to MCM.

The time in service and the cost put this beyond what we are looking at for the MCJ. One pat of this is for it to be accessable internationally. The costs and lab requirements may be too much for this.

RBarryYoung SSC Guru Points: 143329 More actions · Answer 12

Gift Peddie (3/29/2010)
It's entirely possible that the whole problem here is that it's very, very difficult to understand what you're writing, since it isn't standard English.
It is Broadcast Journalism English written as spoken words and word count is the most important.

This statement has nothing to do with "Broadcast Journalism English", it's not a valid English sentence, and no broadcaster would ever let you send it out over the air. Proper language and communication is a lot more than just using the right words, it's even more about grammar, structure, order, syntax and semantics. And it has nothing to do with word counts.

[font="Times New Roman"]-- RBarryYoung[/font], [font="Times New Roman"] (302)375-0451[/font] blog: MovingSQL.com, Twitter: @RBarryYoung [font="Arial Black"]
Proactive Performance Solutions, Inc. [/font][font="Verdana"] "Performance is our middle name."[/font]

SQLRNNR SSC Guru Points: 281334 More actions · Answer 13

Grant Fritchey (3/29/2010)
CirquedeSQLeil (3/29/2010)
Grant Fritchey (3/29/2010)
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.
That is a good reason. I did the ten year track to get my degree.
The only point I was trying to make was that somebody who, like yourself, can climb to the top (like you have) could do those things without much of a problem.
I just about didn't finish up school but then realized that after the kids started growing there would be no time to do it. I hurried through it so I wouldn't have to worry about it later. Has it made a difference - I believe it has. Is that true for everybody - probably not.
I just think that goal oriented people that can climb to the top can do these types of things if "they want" to.
Rereading it, that may have come off as defensive. I didn't mean for it to be. I kind of wish I had a degree because I've often thought that I wouldn't mind swapping jobs completely at some point in my life and just go off and teach history. I'd like nothing better than to be given the chance to corrupt the young on a mass scale.

Re-reading it as well - it doesn't sound defensive.

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

SQLRNNR SSC Guru Points: 281334 More actions · Answer 14

Lynn Pettis (3/29/2010)
CirquedeSQLeil (3/29/2010)
I am willing to remove the time in service from the board. I don't think I would remove the MCITP from the board. I think this pre-req is a representation of the stepping stone certification that the MCJ would represent.
I don't think I could remove the panel review either. I think that would be an essential piece of the puzzle.
Think of the review as having Brent, Jeff, Gail and Paul doing your review. If they signed off on your abilities for the MCJ, I personally think that would be representative enough for the certification. That however should make little bearing in the interview process - just the same as any other cert or degree. If I were your peer and knew that those people approved of your skills along with your exam, then I could give credence to you being an MCJ - you earned it at that point. I think very few people could game a review process when those types of people are performing the review.
Restricting the panel to just 4 specific individuals, however, could make getting the cert more difficult. As Grant indicated, this one should be attainable internationally without having to travel to a specific location. Trying to coordinate a review board of those four individuals could be problematic.
I like the idea of the peer review, but I think this one needs to be looked at in greater detail as to how it could be achieved. I think I'd have to go back through the posts to see what ideas had been floated on that, as I think one of them was to use the User Groups as part of the process. I also believe there was mention of video conferencing as well.

Four per review panel - but the review panel would have to be much bigger than those 4. They were just for the example.

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

Lynn Pettis SSC Guru Points: 442467 More actions · Answer 15

One suggestion was a project review. If structured properly, wouldn't it be possible to use an automated system to test, for instance, setting up a mirrored database in a high availabilty environment (2 partners and a witness)? If the code is provided in a structured manner showing the order and which systems the code is run on, the test would be was it successfully created or not.

To do this, all the necessary requirements would need to be provided up front. In an automated test, there couldn't be issues that may occur, unless those were addressed up front as well to see if they are dealt with or mitigated through code or other methods.

I could see a virtual review (ala virtual conferences) could also be done to reduce travel requirements for candidates and review board members if there are no Users Groups within easy travelling distance.

Users Groups could perhaps even use NetMeeting or what ever it is today, to facilitate such interaction to reduce travel requirements.