Looking for some feedback about Certification

James Edward Gray II wrote:

···

On Nov 10, 2006, at 9:46 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

1. Microsoft certifications, Cisco certifications and Red Hat certifications should be the model. One of these says you are *competent* to perform certain tasks.

2. If I were hiring a *programmer*, I would look for an applicable college degree from an accredited institution, not a certificate based on a pass/fail set of courses.

Wow, it's a good thing I don't hire people. I would make pretty much opposite choices.

This is the one thing Joel Spolsky and I are in total agreement on. He says you need two things in an employee:

1. Passion
2. Gets Things Done

I'll agree on number 2. But passion can mean a lot of things, including an arrogant attitude.

Patrick Hurley wrote:

pat eyler wrote:
> 1) Is Ruby ready for/in need of a certification program?

With the growing size of the Ruby community (and demand for Ruby
programmers) there will undoubtedly be programs of this sort. Of
course having said that, I personally consider certifications programs
(especially for programming languages) one of the worst hiring metrics
available. If you want to find a good programmer, looking for a
language specific certificate is a terrible mistake.

Well, I second that. And here's why: I always thought that nearly everywhere in the world (outside the very notable exception of Germany, and less notable probably a few other countries) you're not evaluated by certificates, school (and university) reports and paper work like that, but your actual proficiency and professionalism. As in: "Real World" work you have done, or at least interviews which aren't superficial but go down to a real technical level.

I had one single interview like that - and I have to say that this was the best one I had. Ever. (As it was back in the mediaeval times, and thus we discussed about the blessings and the dangers of mutiple inheritance, the C++ STL, and runtime vs. compile-time polymorphism.)

Anyway, I think certificates certify that you're capable of getting the certificate. While most don't say much about your problem solving abilities, endurance, patience, abstract thinking and whatever else may be important in the job at hand.

My 2 (Euro) cents

Stephan

···

On 11/10/06, Gustav Paul <gustav@rails.co.za> wrote:

Matt Lawrence wrote:

2. If I were hiring a *programmer*, I would look for an applicable
college degree from an accredited institution, not a certificate based
on a pass/fail set of courses. Again, if a degree is required, there's
no point in the weasel words "or equivalent experience". That's legal
and that's fair. With hundreds of applicants for a single position,
employers can afford to be picky.

I'm not so sure about that. Computer Science degrees often don't teach
software development and are sometimes intended to just be a stepping
stone to advanced degrees. And they really don't teach the things that
are covered in "Ship It!" from the Pragmatic Programmers.

Hiring a programmer without at least a simple coding test is probably a
really bad idea.

Being able to describe in words some of the technologies namedropped on
the CV at a high level ("What is ActiveRecord, and how would you compare
it to a competing product you know?") would be my pick instead. A
developer should be able to communicate those ideas, whether in words,
or in code, and asking for the former lets you cover more ground.

Knowing about and beleiving in things like source code control,
automated build environments and, most importantly, peer review are
probably the top things I would look for.

s/believing/being able to explain why/

For general concepts like that, being able to explain in more depth than
actual specific technologies, which are more subject to change and trend.

David Vallner

James Britt <james.britt@gmail.com> writes:

Someone who wants to write something like "Certified Rubyist" behind
his or her name should not be coding in Ruby. Probably should not be
coding at all.

I should make business cards labeled

  Christian Neukirchen, Rubyist by the grace of God

Mmmmh. :wink:

···

James Britt

--
Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> http://chneukirchen.org

I think this sort of metric would be much more meaningful than a
standardized test. You could call it like a 'practical applications
lab' or something of the like, and make it a requirement for the
course.

···

On 11/10/06, Joel VanderWerf <vjoel@path.berkeley.edu> wrote:

Patrick Hurley wrote:
> On 11/10/06, Gustav Paul <gustav@rails.co.za> wrote:
>> pat eyler wrote:
>> > 1) Is Ruby ready for/in need of a certification program?
>
> With the growing size of the Ruby community (and demand for Ruby
> programmers) there will undoubtedly be programs of this sort. Of
> course having said that, I personally consider certifications programs
> (especially for programming languages) one of the worst hiring metrics
> available. If you want to find a good programmer, looking for a
> language specific certificate is a terrible mistake.

What about assigning each student to make contributions to ruby and to
the community, so that they have something concrete and visible to point
to? For example:

- write std lib docs

- write tests for std libs

- write a brief article or blog entry, with newbies in mind as the readers

- contact a project maintainer (on rubyforge for example) and ask for a
suitable task (not SoC level, but not trivial, either)

I've tried to respond on my blog to all the points made so far.
Thanks for the feedback so far (even if it's just telling me that
certifications are the spawn of the devil).

···

On 11/10/06, Joel VanderWerf <vjoel@path.berkeley.edu> wrote:

Patrick Hurley wrote:
> On 11/10/06, Gustav Paul <gustav@rails.co.za> wrote:
>> pat eyler wrote:
>> > 1) Is Ruby ready for/in need of a certification program?
>
> With the growing size of the Ruby community (and demand for Ruby
> programmers) there will undoubtedly be programs of this sort. Of
> course having said that, I personally consider certifications programs
> (especially for programming languages) one of the worst hiring metrics
> available. If you want to find a good programmer, looking for a
> language specific certificate is a terrible mistake.

What about assigning each student to make contributions to ruby and to
the community, so that they have something concrete and visible to point
to? For example:

- write std lib docs

- write tests for std libs

- write a brief article or blog entry, with newbies in mind as the readers

- contact a project maintainer (on rubyforge for example) and ask for a
suitable task (not SoC level, but not trivial, either)

--
       vjoel : Joel VanderWerf : path berkeley edu : 510 665 3407

--
thanks,
-pate
-------------------------

Joel VanderWerf wrote:

Patrick Hurley wrote:

pat eyler wrote:
> 1) Is Ruby ready for/in need of a certification program?

With the growing size of the Ruby community (and demand for Ruby
programmers) there will undoubtedly be programs of this sort. Of
course having said that, I personally consider certifications programs
(especially for programming languages) one of the worst hiring metrics
available. If you want to find a good programmer, looking for a
language specific certificate is a terrible mistake.

What about assigning each student to make contributions to ruby and to the community, so that they have something concrete and visible to point to? For example:

- write std lib docs

Hey, what a great idea!

- write tests for std libs

This, too.

···

On 11/10/06, Gustav Paul <gustav@rails.co.za> wrote:

--
James Britt

http://web2.0validator.com - We're the Dot in Web 2.0
http://www.rubyaz.org - Hacking in the Desert
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys

Hi --

···

On Sat, 11 Nov 2006, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

James Britt wrote:

Jamis' comment on Pat's blog, though, hit the nail on the head in pointing out that anything called a "certificate" will carry linguistic and work-culture baggage.

And in some corporate cultures, certification is a political necessity. By the way, while we're on the subject of certifications and corporate cultures, am I the only one who thinks someone who has an "ABD" -- All But Dissertation" PhD is really only a Master of Science?

When I was AbD I was a Master of Arts :slight_smile:

David

--
                   David A. Black | dblack@rubypal.com
Author of "Ruby for Rails" [1] | Ruby/Rails training & consultancy [3]
DABlog (DAB's Weblog) [2] | Co-director, Ruby Central, Inc. [4]
[1] Ruby for Rails | [3] http://www.rubypowerandlight.com
[2] http://dablog.rubypal.com | [4] http://www.rubycentral.org

To increase validity and assure authentication, the certification
process should be proctored by an independent agent.

···

On 11/10/06, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote:

James Britt wrote:
> Jamis' comment on Pat's blog, though, hit the nail on the head in
> pointing out that anything called a "certificate" will carry
> linguistic and work-culture baggage.
And in some corporate cultures, certification is a political necessity.
By the way, while we're on the subject of certifications and corporate
cultures, am I the only one who thinks someone who has an "ABD" -- All
But Dissertation" PhD is really only a Master of Science?

<ducking>
>
> I really like the idea of a school offering a formal path of Ruby
> study, and I suppose that, at the end, you would get something that
> indicates success or failure by the standards of the course. You
> know, a certificate.
>
> Overall, there are worse problems to have than people abusing the
> notion of Ruby certification. You'd think more people had seen The
> Wizard of Oz, though.
Well, as Pat and I have both pointed out, there's a tremendous
difference between the Cowardly Lion's medal and an RHCE. I know this
from experience; I've flunked the RHCE exam twice now! :slight_smile:

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, AB, MS, FBG, MNLP, NST, ACMC (provisional) and PTA

James Edward Gray II wrote:

···

On Nov 10, 2006, at 10:06 PM, Matt Lawrence wrote:

Hiring a programmer without at least a simple coding test is probably a really bad idea.

Amen!

James Edward Gray II

I disagree. If a programmer has any experience at all, he or she has to have passed numerous coding tests. Programming is mostly communicating with *people*, in *human* languages, not with computers. I look for attitude first.

actually, I was thinking of the same certification when I wrote that.
I got totally inaccurate information about how hard that test would
be, studied with ridiculous intensity, and then the test was so easy I
could have aced it drunk. the same was true of my other certification.
after two in a row like that, I realized the tests were much less
rewarding than the studying.

if you really want to learn Java in detail, by the way, not that
people on this list frequently express such a wish, but if you do,
read Josh Bloch, e.g., "Java Puzzlers" and "Effective Java." Josh
Bloch is incredibly interesting if you're learning Java in as much
detail as you possibly can, but unintentionally hilarious if you've
been coding Ruby exclusively for six months and haven't touched Java
since you started. (I hate language-bashing, but it's true.)

···

On 11/10/06, James Edward Gray II <james@grayproductions.net> wrote:

On Nov 10, 2006, at 8:34 PM, Giles Bowkett wrote:

> However, they were very useful in the sense of
> learning the technologies in pretty extensive detail.

Wow, I don't think my Java certification taught me Java at all.
Other people seem to put a lot more weight in my piece of paper than
I do.

--
Giles Bowkett
http://www.gilesgoatboy.org

Well said. I agree completely.

James Edward Gray II

···

On Nov 11, 2006, at 2:31 AM, Stephan Kämper wrote:

Anyway, I think certificates certify that you're capable of getting the certificate. While most don't say much about your problem solving abilities, endurance, patience, abstract thinking and whatever else may be important in the job at hand.

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

James Britt wrote:

Overall, there are worse problems to have than people abusing the notion of Ruby certification. You'd think more people had seen The Wizard of Oz, though.

Well, as Pat and I have both pointed out, there's a tremendous difference between the Cowardly Lion's medal and an RHCE. I know this from experience; I've flunked the RHCE exam twice now! :slight_smile:

I was referring to the Scarecrow wishing for brain, but the Wizard giving him a piece of paper instead, because that's what impresses (many) people.

···

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, AB, MS, FBG, MNLP, NST, ACMC (provisional) and PTA

--
James Britt, BS and PITA

Stephan Kämper wrote:

Patrick Hurley wrote:

pat eyler wrote:
> 1) Is Ruby ready for/in need of a certification program?

With the growing size of the Ruby community (and demand for Ruby
programmers) there will undoubtedly be programs of this sort. Of
course having said that, I personally consider certifications programs
(especially for programming languages) one of the worst hiring metrics
available. If you want to find a good programmer, looking for a
language specific certificate is a terrible mistake.

Well, I second that. And here's why: I always thought that nearly everywhere in the world (outside the very notable exception of Germany, and less notable probably a few other countries) you're not evaluated by certificates, school (and university) reports and paper work like that, but your actual proficiency and professionalism. As in: "Real World" work you have done, or at least interviews which aren't superficial but go down to a real technical level.

Lack of certification in many instances means there will not be an interview. Some people whine about that fact. I say that if there *is* a Ruby or Rails certificate, it must be as comprehensive as the Microsoft, Cisco or Red Hat certifications.

I had one single interview like that - and I have to say that this was the best one I had. Ever. (As it was back in the mediaeval times, and thus we discussed about the blessings and the dangers of mutiple inheritance, the C++ STL, and runtime vs. compile-time polymorphism.)

How did that work out for you and for the employer? What were the business results?

Anyway, I think certificates certify that you're capable of getting the certificate. While most don't say much about your problem solving abilities, endurance, patience, abstract thinking and whatever else may be important in the job at hand.

For some definition of "most", this could be true. In the case of Microsoft, Cisco and Red Hat, in my opinion it is emphatically *not* true -- the certificate is an excellent indicator of the certified person's abilities to produce consistent business results in the area covered.

But since we're talking about development (Ruby/Rails) rather than system administration positions, let's narrow this down to the Microsoft MCSD exams. I haven't browsed the Microsoft criteria and course list recently, but I work with people who have these certificates and believe they have value.

Finally, let's talk about a typical hiring cycle in a medium to large development project. First of all, when the project begins, most of the people on it will already be employed in the company and be known quantities. It's rare that people will need to be hired from outside, and every effort will be made to limit the number of outside hires required.

But let's assume that the project management has justified the new hires. There will be a job posting. Let's say it's a Microsoft project, and let's say they are using Windows Server 2003, SQL Server 2005, ASP.NET, IIS and C# -- the whole Windows stack, analogous to, say, Linux/Apache-Mongrel/MySQL-PostgreSQL/Ruby-Rails. I would *insist* that *every* new hire be certified in the technology that the position would use. No certificate -- no interview. That would most likely get me at least five qualified applicants for each position.

Now in the interview process, I want to know what *you* did that you got *paid* for. I don't want to debate my choice of SQL Server 2005 vs. your preference for PostgreSQL. I don't want to hear you whine about C# and having to declare variables. I don't want to hear about all the fun stuff you did with Linux on your Athlon Thunderbird nights and weekends. I short, I want to know if you can carry out assignments and deliver business results.

So by my analogy, were I starting a medium to large Rails project -- to make things easy, let's assume I'm using Red Hat Enterprise Linux and Oracle, for which I can hire vendor-certified folks. I'm going to plead ignorance on the Apache front -- I don't know if there are Apache certifications. There sure as hell ought to be -- it's a complicated beast with lots of options. :slight_smile: What would I want from a Ruby/Rails certified new hire?

Same thing as I want for an ASP.NET/C# certified person. I want to know you can carry out assignments and deliver business results. At a minimum, I'd want you to have down cold everything in the Pickaxe book, everything in AWDR, and everything in "Ruby for Rails".

···

On 11/10/06, Gustav Paul <gustav@rails.co.za> wrote:

No I think just talking to the person would be sufficient, but that seems to
be the whole problem, when hiring we need certificates and tests, because we
cannot afford a competent person doing a final selection.
Accepting this as an economic constraint one might be forced to accept needs
for tests and certificates.
As I am not accepting any such thing (c.f. sig) I too believe it is evil.

Cheers
Robert

···

On 11/11/06, James Edward Gray II <james@grayproductions.net> wrote:

On Nov 10, 2006, at 10:06 PM, Matt Lawrence wrote:

> Hiring a programmer without at least a simple coding test is
> probably a really bad idea.

Amen!

James Edward Gray II

--
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress
depends on the unreasonable man.

- George Bernard Shaw

The students should be asked to post to RubyTalk indicating they've
just completed the course. Then we can interrogate them, and
eventually come to a consensus of whether or not they pass :wink:

···

On 11/10/06, x1 <caldridge@gmail.com> wrote:

To increase validity and assure authentication, the certification
process should be proctored by an independent agent.

dblack@wobblini.net wrote:

Hi --

James Britt wrote:

Jamis' comment on Pat's blog, though, hit the nail on the head in pointing out that anything called a "certificate" will carry linguistic and work-culture baggage.

And in some corporate cultures, certification is a political necessity. By the way, while we're on the subject of certifications and corporate cultures, am I the only one who thinks someone who has an "ABD" -- All But Dissertation" PhD is really only a Master of Science?

When I was AbD I was a Master of Arts :slight_smile:

Now a Master of the Black Arts.

···

On Sat, 11 Nov 2006, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

--
James Britt

"To predict the behavior of ordinary people in advance, you only have to
assume that they will always try to escape a disagreeable situation with
the smallest possible expenditure of intelligence."
    - Friedrich Nietzsche

Gregory Brown wrote:

To increase validity and assure authentication, the certification
process should be proctored by an independent agent.

The students should be asked to post to RubyTalk indicating they've
just completed the course. Then we can interrogate them, and
eventually come to a consensus of whether or not they pass :wink:

Ugh. Just. Ugh. IIRC my optional school Java course and the level of
language knowledge I gained from it correctly, having come to a mailing
list of an equivalent level, I'd simultaneously annoy and depress the
hell out of myself both ways.

In mildly related news, I'm also getting a migraine trying to understand
the above paragraph. There's a Ruby Quiz idea, a natural language
processor that can syntactically untangle my rants :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

David Vallner

···

On 11/10/06, x1 <caldridge@gmail.com> wrote: