Re: Certification Available +Pronounce

As some one who holds many certifications (in order of value: MCSA,
MCSE, Inet+, A+, Server+, Network+, LPIC-2), I feel inclined to chime in
here...... For the record, I passed the LPIC-2 and Server+ exams during
their beta testing stage. At the end of the email I will share my
thoughts about PostgreSQL certification, but the rest is certification
experience in general.

David Fetter wrote:

>On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 05:12:08PM +0100, Robert Cleary wrote:
>
>
>>David Fetter wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Not when those beginners are labeled "professionals."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Fair-point!, the only reason I came to this query - is that i'm
>>currently looking up proffessional certifications at work; there is
>>also mixed opinions about certifications for most other IT areas.
>>
>>
>
>I am not aware of any area where the opinions are "mixed" on
>certifications, except in the sense that incompetent HR people like
>them and the people who have to work with (or worse yet, deal with the
>result from) certified incompetents do not.
>
>
>
This is a big point. When I worked at Microsoft, I was required to pass
a certain number of Microsoft certifications per year. I passed the
other ones to keep myself balanced and sane because I didn't want to be
trapped working with Windows the rest of my life.....

>This is precisely where we *dis*agree. Although I have met several
>competent people who hold certifications, my experience is that in the
>overwhelming majority of cases, a certificate tells you that the
>person is *not* competent.
>
>
With all due respect, it depends on the certification. There can be
well designed certifications, but these usually have a hands-on lab
component. I passed the IIS4 (and entirely based on my Apache and IIS 5
experience, no less) exam without cracking a book and was rather amused
to see it rated as one of the hardest exams in the NT4 series. I
suppose this is because it was the only exam that Microsoft designed
that was ever worth anything.

Similarly the LPIC-1 exams were really good. They were *really*
difficult (but with a low passing score). But they really tested one's
sense of fluency with the command line among other things. I *learned*
a lot taking these exams.

But this is the problem: People often see certifications as a quick and
easy substitute for learning the technology. Of course, in the long
run, learning the technology is far less effort than bumbling around a
system you think you know how to use but don't really understand how it
works, but this is not the rational most people have, both those who
want to be technicians and those who want to hire technicians but don't
know what they do.

Finally almost all certifications end at the "technician" level. It is
very hard to test someone's deep understanding of a technology without
resorting to formuleic questions which are easily memorized. As far as
I am concerned the only "certified engineers" are those with college
degrees in engineering disciplines (including CS). To call someone a
Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer is like saying that someone holds a
Masters in Electrical Engineering from a Non-Accredited University (and
just paid his $50 to get the diploma). To test this point, I had
considered trying to see if I could pass the VB MCSD certifications
without actually learning any real VB....

The reason why I don't tout my certifications is simply that I know my
material reasonably well and I don't want to be associated with those
MCSE's who cannot figure out how to fix Microsoft Word when it opens
minimized.....

>>- experience is allways the telling-point someones ability; but when
>>you hear that some one is CISCO certified proffessional, or Sun
>>Certified Java programmer, or Red Hat Certified Engineer for example
>>- a certain air of respect carries with these titles.
>>
>>
>
>What air of respect? Among people competent to make hiring decisions,
>such a certificate conveys an air of disrespect.
>
>
Knowing what I know about the RHCE program, I would probably see it as a
positive step. But again, all you know you are getting is someone you
hope will be a decent technician *not* a certified engineer.

>I am not denying the possibility of a certification that really means
>something, but that would mean that at a minimum:
>
>1. There would be a significant, checkable prior work requirement for
>taking the certification exam, and
>
>
This is the real problem (chicken-or-egg). Furthermore the definitions
of work in this case would prove problematic. Where exactly one draws a
line here is pretty tough.

>2. Some large percentage of those who take the exam fail it and would
>not immediately get another chance to re-take it.
>
>
>
No problem here. But what do you do when vendor training is often
offered as a part of the certification problem (like the RHCE)?

>3. The exam would involve quite complicated hands-on use cases and
>would not contain any questions whose correct answer was a quote from
>the documents.
>
>
This is one of the things I have liked about the RHCE documentations is
that it emphasizes hands-on work.

>These criteria are anathema to the profit motive, which is why, to my
>knowlege, no such certification currently exists.
>
>
Aside from criteria 1, it is more an issue of degree than substance.

Now for PostgreSQL certification. A *real* PostgreSQL certification
project would be extremely difficult and runs up against at least the
following issues:

1) There is a lot of bad information out there about database design
2) Unlike Oracle, administering the basic server is not that
complicated. I.e. the barrier to being a technician is pretty low.
3) Very few programmers want to know how to use an RDBMS properly (part
of why MySQL is so popular).

So you are stuck.

Most vendor-sponsored certification programs are marketing programs in
disguise "Look at the Cool Stuff(tm) you can do with our software." In
the case of the MCP exams, they often fail miserably. In other words,
they teach on features rather than substance which is *why* you get
people working well above their ability simply because they have a
certification (they didn't realize it but they were being trained to
sell the software rather than use it). Do we really want that image for
PostgreSQL?

If I wanted to recommend existing certifications for someone who wanted
to get a cert that would help him be a safe DBA, I would suggest that
he/she start with the Server+, and then take the LPI track. As for
database design, that is another matter. Study, Study, Study. No
certification required.

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
Metatron Technology Consulting