September 10, 2013 at 9:00 am
I agree completely that testing task knowledge is superior to testing syntax, and I'd suggest that testing syntax is more tightly tied to selling "stuff" than testing task knowledge. After all, task knowledge doesn't need you to recertify for every new version of the product... syntax (and its GUI variants) can!
Taken to the logical conclusion, this brings us to a very interesting place, however, as many of the differences between DB2, MariaDB/MySQL, Oracle, PostgreSQL, SQL Server are syntax differences, and very mild ones compared to the differences between C++, Lisp, and Perl (for example).
SELECT Col1 FROM Table1 WHERE Col2 = 33
for instance, is near-identical on any major relational database based (more strictly or less strictly) on ANSI SQL standards. ACID compliance is the same. Normal forms are the same. The idea of transaction log/redo log files/archive logs/etc. is very similar, with twists on the implementations. The idea of Point in Time Restores is the same.
The idea of data order vs. separate indexes is identical. Compression tradeoffs are similar, and so on.
Thus, we could start with a SQL DBA cert not related to any particular product, and then move into the various flavors - and in the doing, all of us would be exposed to different ways of implementing those concepts, and perhaps even do better in the future.
September 10, 2013 at 9:25 am
Nadrek (9/10/2013)
I agree completely that testing task knowledge is superior to testing syntax, and I'd suggest that testing syntax is more tightly tied to selling "stuff" than testing task knowledge. After all, task knowledge doesn't need you to recertify for every new version of the product... syntax (and its GUI variants) can!Taken to the logical conclusion, this brings us to a very interesting place, however, as many of the differences between DB2, MariaDB/MySQL, Oracle, PostgreSQL, SQL Server are syntax differences, and very mild ones compared to the differences between C++, Lisp, and Perl (for example).
SELECT Col1 FROM Table1 WHERE Col2 = 33
for instance, is near-identical on any major relational database based (more strictly or less strictly) on ANSI SQL standards. ACID compliance is the same. Normal forms are the same. The idea of transaction log/redo log files/archive logs/etc. is very similar, with twists on the implementations. The idea of Point in Time Restores is the same.
The idea of data order vs. separate indexes is identical. Compression tradeoffs are similar, and so on.
Thus, we could start with a SQL DBA cert not related to any particular product, and then move into the various flavors - and in the doing, all of us would be exposed to different ways of implementing those concepts, and perhaps even do better in the future.
I know some educational agencies have specific database certifications and perhaps more importance and emphasis should be placed on that, as they teach the fundamentals and "vendor-neutral" understanding of databases.
When I went through university and concentrated on databases, I know we learnt our querying via relational algerbra and calculus...etc.
September 10, 2013 at 10:14 am
The same arguments against certifications could be used against high school and college diplomas. They show you attended classes and got decent grades - good enough to pass. They don't show how you will perform in a work environment.
Certifications present a certain set of information. As I see it, the two main problems are:
1. Conflict of Interest when the certificate is issued by the software vendor for the product
2. Hiring managers assuming the certificate guarantees things which it patently does not (work ethic, troubleshooting ability, plays well with others, etc)
So yeah, I'm for certificates issued by neutral third-party organizations - and preferably for skill sets rather than knowledge of a specific product version. I do realize some software is complex enough that a certificate for knowledge of that product might be useful, and I would agree that SQL Server and Oracle likely fall into that category. I just think it's important to know what the testing is based on for any certificate when you use it in the hiring process. Then you know what it shows about the person who holds it.
Steph Brown
September 10, 2013 at 11:08 am
The brain dump sites really borke the process even with adaptive tests. People study for the answers versus the work reality. But people do that in school as well, so a degree doesn't really truly mean as much. Heck we even have a list of questions we cooked up for interviewing people but I have come to realize they must be sharing the info because too many folks come in answering questions almost text book and all the people give the almost exact same answer verbatum. But we always have things we keep in reserve to catch them off guard or we reword the questions to confuse them. The reality is you will always have people who cheat any system. Doesn't mean the system itself is bad, but always be skeptical of anyone who has a cert. I have a few (I don't even remember all of them) but I don't use them to present myself because I know when I took them I did study and learn and practice and I have done several beta tests blind that I have passed so I know what I have truly accomplished and don't need to flash these to prove anything.
I like to see what people say they know but don't expect me to leave it at that. Besides you might have had a clue at one time when you got the cert but haven't used in in a long enough period you have actually forgotten it.
Grain of salt and a lot of skepticism is my rule.
September 10, 2013 at 11:59 am
Stephanie J Brown (9/10/2013)
As I see it, the two main problems are:1. Conflict of Interest when the certificate is issued by the software vendor for the product
2. Hiring managers assuming the certificate guarantees things which it patently does not (work ethic, troubleshooting ability, plays well with others, etc)
I just think it's important to know what the testing is based on for any certificate when you use it in the hiring process. Then you know what it shows about the person who holds it.
Very good points indeed Stephanie. The ability to memorize material or brainsdumps and pass tests does not shed any light whatsoever on what kind of employee they are going to be or their expertise level for that matter as well... 😀
"Technology is a weird thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other. ...:-D"
September 10, 2013 at 12:18 pm
I still don't see a lot of good answers to the basic question. If I wanted to apply for a job as a DBA (mid level or higher) and you were in charge of looking over my resume etc to decide if I am qualified enough to interview what can I do to prove I am qualified outside of a certification?
This is the problem we face in my view.
Sure I am finding the certification's provide a great study guide for learning things in SQL Server that I would not otherwise have known to study, but we can fix that problem other ways. The real value of a certification for someone like me is that it "proves" a basic level of knowledge to a hiring manager to get me through the first application cull and in the door for an interview.
September 10, 2013 at 12:19 pm
Stephanie J Brown (9/10/2013)
Certifications present a certain set of information. As I see it, the two main problems are:...
2. Hiring managers assuming the certificate guarantees things which it patently does not (work ethic, troubleshooting ability, plays well with others, etc)
Ability to actually do anything covered by the certification, knowing what any of the answers mean, ability to answer any of the certification questions today rather than when they took the cert test, etc. etc.
Personally, I completely ignore the certs except to ask harder questions. Degrees likewise - the more advanced your degree, the harder the questions I'll ask, but that's all.
September 10, 2013 at 12:26 pm
Nadrek (9/10/2013)
Stephanie J Brown (9/10/2013)
Certifications present a certain set of information. As I see it, the two main problems are:...
2. Hiring managers assuming the certificate guarantees things which it patently does not (work ethic, troubleshooting ability, plays well with others, etc)
Ability to actually do anything covered by the certification, knowing what any of the answers mean, ability to answer any of the certification questions today rather than when they took the cert test, etc. etc.
Personally, I completely ignore the certs except to ask harder questions. Degrees likewise - the more advanced your degree, the harder the questions I'll ask, but that's all.
Not really, I know from my encounters don't rely on just one resume to tell your story. Make sure you build a resume targerted to your audience to demonstrate you in fact have the qualifications to do the job. Typically you will then be interviewed and your personality are the key factors. I will also so I have a pet pieve about folks who blow smoke instead of saying they don't know right off but can research it at first chance. I'd rather have someone tell me they will find the answer or your best educated guess is right off ... when they are stumped rather than make one up. Just be sure all your answers aren't I don't know. lol (I'd still respect you more but I wouldn't hire you).
September 10, 2013 at 12:26 pm
So if I wanted to apply for a job with you how do I get in the door with no certifications, and experience I have but can't prove I have etc...
September 10, 2013 at 12:33 pm
krowley (9/10/2013)
So if I wanted to apply for a job with you how do I get in the door with no certifications, and experience I have but can't prove I have etc...
First off I didn't say certs wouldn't help, you just need to paint the how you can meet my needs. If you have gotten a cert and have no experience then your studying is your experience, you want to focus on courses of study and and side work you have done. But of course with limited experience outside of real work you would be looking for a junior level job. You might know your stuff but until you can demonstrate it don't oversell yourself. Likewise after you get experience under your belt don't undersell yourself and just remain in your current job if you can increase your rate by moving on, if that is your goal. But your resume should be an extension of the job you are applying for. Make sure it highlights how you meet their goals from their job description.
September 10, 2013 at 1:41 pm
Honestly when I hire, your education and certifications are secondary in nature. It's nice to know, but who I call in is based on the work experience section.
Furthermore, once you are called in, there's a practical written exam to determine a general overview of one's knowledge, and then there's the interview.
September 10, 2013 at 2:15 pm
Jason Cheung (9/10/2013)
Honestly when I hire, your education and certifications are secondary in nature. It's nice to know, but who I call in is based on the work experience section.Furthermore, once you are called in, there's a practical written exam to determine a general overview of one's knowledge, and then there's the interview.
But once again work experience is much easier to lie about than a certification. At least with the certification you have Something you can verify about a potential job seeker.
September 10, 2013 at 6:38 pm
krowley (9/10/2013)
But once again work experience is much easier to lie about than a certification. At least with the certification you have Something you can verify about a potential job seeker.
Actually the best bet is to build a portfolio. The portfolio will have a sections with job history, certifications, education, work samples, and in my case a section on my military history including my USAF performance reports. And if you worked for a company that did annual performance reviews, include those as well (as appropriate).
When the interviewer asks you about your certifications -- open to that section. And I would consider a rating from SSC of journeyman something worth taking a look at on the interviewer side of the table. That means that you aren't an 8-5 type person and/or you at least try to think. But if I see you do nothing but post Google monkey links without any thought, I would wonder how good you are.
----------------
Jim P.
A little bit of this and a little byte of that can cause bloatware.
September 10, 2013 at 8:30 pm
Some sorts of certification are extremely useful. Others are not.
Something that effectively tells me nothing about someone's knowledge and capabilities, because it can be got by doing a cheap crammer course and remembering stuff parrot-like just long enough to pass the exam, is not useful; did someone with that certification get it that way? How do I know? Did they get it by learning the stuff through real practical experience? How do I know? Given that I can't know, I can't assign any value to MCSE or any of the other MS certifications at that level; and I believe that anyone who is recruiting and does assign value to such a certification is a fool. Most people who have any experience know that these certifications are like that, so why are they going to take them? Could it be that they want to get a job that they aren't capable of doing by finding some fool who values the certification? Or that they don't have enough experience to realise that the real value of such a certification is zero?
The now defunct (or maybe just moribund?) MCA and MCM certifications were certifications that would tell me something; they couldn't be obtained without understanding the technology, and required demonstration of skills in using it. So those certifications do have a value. I firmly believe that someone who has obtained one has demonstrated a capacity for learning (both in the sense of acquiring knowledge and in the sense of acquiring skills); which means of course that recertification is irrelevant, except perhaps as an indication of continued professional development (ie continued learning) much as is required in order to retain chartered status in an engineering or scientific profession (I believe that PE status in the USA has a similar requirement), and there are probably far better ways of continuing ones professional development than recertifying for the next generation Microsoft product.
Academic certifications (aka degrees) are similar; a typical bachelors degree indicates that some knowledge has been acquired, but says little or nothing about skill (there are exceptions, of course); it's harder to game by brain-dump than the low level MS qualifications partly because it doesn't use multiple choice questions and partly because it covers rather more knowledge (again there are exceptions). Masters degrees split neatly into several groups: one year conversion courses can generally be crammed; some UK taught masters courses are pure bovine waste product; typical taught masters in the USA simply bring up the amount of learning required to typical European first degree standard; some British taught masters courses do teach some skill as well as some extra knowledge; masters by research at some UK universities are pretty good evidence of some skills and the ability to think for oneself and to create new techniques; MBAs are of course a good certification of disqualification from any job which requires any understanding of anything other than generation of the aforementioned bovine produce. Doctorates are generally good evidence of technical competence. But although a first degree is a somewhat more valid certification of ability to learn than an MCSE it is valuable only in distinguishing between people who haven't yet obtained any real experience (and from some universities it isn't even valuable for that); in the case of masters degrees by research getting a copy of the thesis and reading it before deciding whether to call the candidate in for interview could be useful, as can talking to whoever supervised the research if you are lucky enough to know them personally, but other masters degrees are just a first degree taken a bit further. doctorates can be an indication that someone is ready to take on a (fairly junior) senior technical role (not a management role, however) but again it is a good idea to talk to the research supervisor and/or read the thesis.
Far more important than certifications, whether academic or Microsoft or any other, and essential for recruiting into senior positions (other than fairly junior senior positions), is track record. The resumé may tell you about that, or it may be pure fiction; so only someone who trusts valueless certification will trust resumés; where possible, these should be checked (in the UK, with our libel laws, translating the response from previous employers is an amusing exercise; "Mr XYZ joined this firm on date1 as a software developer and his period of notice ended on date2" is about as nasty as it can safely get, unless he was fired for something criminal, like sexual assault on another employee in an elevator or selling company secrets to the competition). So a better approach than getting certifications is to get yourself a verifiable track record - and remember that subordinates and colleagues will have an opinion of you and that that may be just as important to a potential employer as the opinion of your manager.
My first two jobs depended on my academic certifications; my next job depended on them too, plus recommendations from my second employer, as did my fourth job; That fourth job started in 1971, and since then I have had many different jobs, each job change based only on my track record - because each time I went to work for someone who wanted specifically me because either they knew me or had asked people they trusted to recommend someone and I got recommended. During that time I've acquired extra certifications, formal professional ones rather than academic or supplier certs, but these have had no impact on getting jobs (although sometime they made doing the job easier) because once you have verifiable track record potential employers (unless remarkably stupid, but I delete the stupid ones from my potential employer list as a matter of course) are not interested in certifications.
Tom
September 10, 2013 at 11:34 pm
LightVader (9/10/2013)
I really like this idea. Having a third party running all tech certifications, not just Microsoft, sounds like a step in the right direction.
I agree with the idea as well. But I remember the days of the A+ certification as well.
Now a dumb thought -- find/build a DB system that is close to the ISO-92 standard. Then the first step is to load it on a system (via script) and the required results for the test are results of queries based off word problems:
Give the results of all employees that are over 25.
Give the results of all customers over 25 in a given zip code.
etc.
Step two:
Add a view based off all employees that are assigned to a zip code.
Add a stored proc that gives all tech employees that are assigned to a zip code. (the resulting table is the answer and computer compared). The SP is "useless" but the result set is the answer.
etc.
Step three:
Build a table based off the words in the specs given. Send in the script. Does the resulting table work? etc.
Then everyone at least has the same basis, and 95% could be based off matching the input scripts. Then have specific tests for SQL, Oracle, Interbase, etc.
----------------
Jim P.
A little bit of this and a little byte of that can cause bloatware.
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 43 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply