Robert Cleary wrote:
> If certifications are seen in a bad-light, I believe it's directly
> because people sell-out their principles, or just plain set-out to
> make cash.
>
> Now, if a pgsql certification was set-up, justified and qualified by a
> peer-reviewed examining process - rooted - in the quality/pride
> principle that seems to be pgsql, I can't see how it would damage pgsql.
>
> This might be a mad-idea, but if you can build an open-source DBMS,
> why can't you build a certification by the same process?: open-source
> collaboration for its inception, elaboration, construction and deployment?
I don't think that a certification can ever be open source for the
reason that the testing method usually presupposes that people don't
have a chance to research the questions ahead of time. Of course for a
*really advanced* certification this might not be an obstacle. But in
those cases, all we really need is a written/practical exam and an oral
defence of it. Sort of similar to what we require of people who get
graduate degrees...... But hey, you are then looking for people's
ability to take information they have mastered and use it to come up
with their own solutions to a specific problem. One could give people
hard problems, and award certifications based on their abilities to
solve them. The answers could then be provided online and used to
evaluate students' performance by potential employers. The questions
would change *frequently* (maybe once a month).
However, I think that our time would be better spent on trying to come
up with an open source curriculum which testing vendors could use for
their certification exams, at least in the beginning. Such an advanced
certification could be useful later, but I think we would need to start
with qualifying certifications. If there is sufficient interest, I can
set up a wiki for people to use to share thoughts.
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
Metatron Technology Consulting