Re: Is MCSD worth doing?
From: TomTom (no_spam_at_nospamfordiscussion.com)
Date: 01/02/05
- Next message: Sean: "Re: .Net Certification details"
- Previous message: The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere: "Re: .Net Certification details"
- In reply to: The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere: "Re: Is MCSD worth doing?"
- Next in thread: The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere: "Re: Is MCSD worth doing?"
- Reply: The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere: "Re: Is MCSD worth doing?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 11:21:27 -0800
It's always interesting to read your comments. My comments inline.
"The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere" <.> wrote in message
news:25nft0t8voi6ducsceqg7cmfee9cacu5ll@4ax.com...
>>> Obtaining a degree especially a higher level degree is the best, and
>>> often only way, to make a start in a chosen career (any career, not
>>> just IT) path.
>>
>>I took the MCSD exams and passed them now. In preparing the exams, I seem
>>to
>>have a good understand of how I should use the MS technologies.
>
> which is as far as microsoft are concerned, is the point of the exams.
>
People should have correct expectation from the certification if they don't
have it now.
>> With the
>>preparation on 70-300, I seem to have an understanding on the basics of
>>the
>>object oriented design.
>
> 70-300 covered the 'very' basics of software development. I sure in
> your everyday work you find the challenges more stimulating than those
> encountered in 70-300.
>
Is it true that many programmers cannot explain OOP even in the very basic
level? 70-300 will prove that you have the very basics then, if the person
did not cheat, which is the big problem. :)
>> My question to you is, what kind of great things
>>you can learn from a university or graduate school that you cannot learn
>>by
>>preparing the exams?
>
> oh dear.
>
> Well for a start the subject is more vast and varied, which is more
> relevant to the industry as a whole. Software is about solving
> business problems NOT buzzwords.
>
> One example you have already answered for yourself 'MS technologies'.
> This would count for little in a non microsoft environment, and
> believe me there are plenty of corporations out there who are not.
> Vendor exams promote the vendors products, nothing more.
>
Isnt' being able to use the MS technologies important still? I agree that
anybody can program with the RAD tools and the programs created will help to
solve the business problems. They may not be as sophisticated as the
programs created by the first-rate programmer, but there are many situations
that they'll do the job fine. Because of the wide use of Windows platform,
many companies probably want to know if the job candidates know how to
program using MS technologies.
By the way, before .NET came out, I tried Java Servlet and JSP using Forte
for Java. At that time, I thought that the tool is reasonably easy to use
but once I began using VS.NET, I cannot go back to Forte. The productivity
dramatically increased in my case. The difficulty may be due to Forte at
that time though.
> In any case the requirements covered in the exams do not reflect the
> real world. If you believe 70-300 represents the real world, you are
> very much mistaken. Software engineering a vast subject, people have
> written books on the subject which good as they are, often barely
> touch the surface. Where in the ms exams do you encounter at any level
> which requires even the most basic of explanations for the role of,
> and how to conduct the process of, project management, risk analysis,
> configuration management, outsoursing, estimating (resources, time &
> materials), verification & validation, professional issues, contract
> management. Not to mention the various methods and processes, which if
> you believe the msf is the correct framework for every problem, again
> you are very much mistaken.
>
But can the CS department of the universities educate you on the subjects
you mentinoed above? They have different department and I believe you need
to learn in those department. There are different certifications for those
subjects. :-)
> The ms (and some other vendor) exams are trivial. Answering a question
> does not prove an understanding of the question. Nowhere do you have
> to explain and/or describe how you arrived at the answer or even write
> anything (which makes me laugh when people state they are about to
> 'write' 76-543). Often all that was achieved was selecting the correct
> answer from a list which actually included the answer - ridicules. In
> addition, many people do pass these 'exams' simply by memorizing the
> answers from practice tests and from brain dumps - little learning or
> understanding gained here. I wonder how many people could write an
> original 20,000 word dissertation/thesis on the msf, the dot net
> framework or the J2EE?
>
If you know how to use the MS technologies well, the questions are trivial,
I am sure. In my case, the questions were not easy when I began to prepare
for the exams especially because there are subjects that I don't usually
work on. I needed to learn those from little knowledge.
> In addition, I can guarantee you will get laid far more at college and
> university than you will while 'studying' for the ms exams, and no
> your sister don't count ;-)
>
>> I don't have a CS degree and I honestly don't know. I
>>imagine you learn subjects for which computer is a great aid (maths,
>>statistics, etc.) and you learn non-MS technologies.
>
> No, I never learnt any vendor 'technologies', and today (as always)
> computers are just a tool for me to use.
>
> Learning and using (and not using) new 'technologies' is part and
> parcel of the profession. Nothing has change in this respect in the
> twenty plus years I've been in this game. However there are more
> 'technologies' to choose from which means more to reject.
>
> Once again you choose to include 'MS' in your argument, so I'll point
> out that domain and specification modeling should have no concern for
> the underlying technologies to be used, yet these are the most
> important stages. Only during design and implementation should the
> choice of 'technologies' be of any concern. One of the funniest things
> I ever herd was from a so called IT director, who once said 'We cannot
> start the project because VB 6 has not been released yet'! Still,
> after he was 'released', he found a more financially rewarding career
> selling real estate.
This is interesting because I can understand your point after I study for
70-300.
>
>> If you have good
>>examples on this, can you let me know?
>
> Well apart from what I've just mentioned here, you only have to look
> at what employers require for entry level (first role) IT positions.
> If you see entry level positions on monster, job serve, the labor
> exchange, etc which require no educational qualifications, please let
> the people here know.
>
My guess is that employers can gather good job candidates by including the
educational requirements for the entry-level positions. They might be
assuming that people who apply for the entry-level positions do not have
experiences, thus educational requirements.
> If you feel this is inaccurate then help all those looking for a
> career in IT find there way forward, as you have done. Maybe tell them
> about the company which first hired you into the IT profession and how
> you have progressed to date. People without degrees have done so
> before, they will do so now and in the future, but many, many more
> have failed and will fail in the future.
I once worked for a manager who really cared about the lack of my CS degree.
Employers that focus too much on degrees or certifications are probably not
good employers. However I understand that with no degree and no
certifications, the employers probably don't have time to asses the skill of
the candidates. If a person wants to work in IT and has no degree, I think
getting certifications is a good start because it increases his/her
possibility of getting a job. I work on IT, but I do not write code for
released software. I work on international stuff and write tools for
improving the process. There probably are more job disciplines that require
programming knowledge and skill but does not require programming for the
released products. These areas might have more lenient educational
requirements, but might require you to have other special knowledge.
>
> Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
- Next message: Sean: "Re: .Net Certification details"
- Previous message: The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere: "Re: .Net Certification details"
- In reply to: The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere: "Re: Is MCSD worth doing?"
- Next in thread: The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere: "Re: Is MCSD worth doing?"
- Reply: The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere: "Re: Is MCSD worth doing?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
