 |
|
 |
|
 |
Greg Neilson
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
The Mystery of Developer Certifications |
| Why haven't certs like the MCSD caught on? |
| by Greg Neilson |
|
11/15/2000 -- One of the great mysteries in the certification world is why developer certification has never really caught on. I have a few theories on why that may be, and I would welcome your comments as well.
If we look at Microsoft's MCSE program, there are almost 400,000 IT professionals who currently hold it, with many thousands more in the pipeline. In fact, with this many MCSEs, you could argue that the MCSE is entirely too popular.
Yet compare this number with the number of MCSDs out there (those certified as developers on the Microsoft platforms). In just the last few months, the number of current MCSDs has dropped from 30,000 to only around 10,000 now that the previous version of this program has expired. Surely this isn't representative of the number of developers on the Microsoft platform (the number of VB programmers in industry is much higher). So why aren't developers going for this certification?
|
'Microsoft elected to force MCSDs to retake the core exams as well.'
|
One factor may be the inept manner in which Microsoft has managed it. There have been a number of major changes in the format of the program, which I'll call versions 1, 2 and 3. Version 1 of the MCSD consisted of two core WOSA exams plus two electives. Version 2 consisted of two core Windows Architecture exams plus two electives. Version 3, the current version, consists of a core Analyzing Requirements exam, two exams in your language of choice (VB or VC++) plus an elective. I don't think anyone would dispute the fact that those already certified with an MCSD need to keep up to date with the latest versions of their development tool of choice, but, when introducing these subsequent program formats, Microsoft elected to force MCSDs to retake the core exams as well. For example, I completed my MCSD in 1996 with version 1 and held it until the version 2 format expired. Having already re-done three exams from a four-exam program to re-certify for that version, Microsoft announced the latest version, which would mean passing yet another three exams.
Interestingly, in the Lotus Notes/Domino arena there are twice as many developer CLPs (Certified Lotus Professionals) as those holding system administration CLPs for both R4 and R5 -- a real contrast to the Microsoft programs. I can only surmise that the prevalence of these CLP developer certifications may be related to the certification requirements for becoming a Lotus Business Partner. Many of these BPs make much of their money writing and modifying custom applications for the Notes/Domino platform.
Another major developer program, Sun's Java certification, doesn't appear to release numbers, so I can't comment on its success or otherwise. But I do like the concept of the program's developer exam, which builds on the theory of the programmer exam by adding a practical assignment that must be handed in and marked.
Even with some successes, developer certifications overall tend to be less popular than their networking counterpart. In my opinion, there are two major reasons for this:
- To be a successful developer, there are a great many more professional skills required than just coding with a specific development tool. Therefore, holding a certification is not much of a guide in what the holder is able to do for clients/employers.
- Many of the later MCSEs are career-changers, who are using their certification to help them enter the IT arena. This is fine for network administrators, who can come up through the ranks with the technical knowledge from the program and learn the rest as they go. But for developers, there are many formal techniques (modelling, testing, software engineering, normalisation etc) they need to know before they can become a productive application developer. Of course, you can learn these without completing a degree, but it's an uphill task.
Even so, programmers who are cross-training from another platform to Windows have a compelling reason to get an MCSD. In this case, they already have hard-won application development experience and then can show that they have a grasp of the basic elements of Windows development. Sure, they still need some professional experience in programming these products to become a full-fledged Windows developer, but they have already proven their interest and should prove a low-risk prospect for the future.
What do you think? I'm interested in your take on developer certifications. Post your comments below. Also, in my next column, I'll be answering some of your certification questions directly. If you need certification advice, e-mail me directly at .
|
Greg Neilson, MCSE+Internet, MCNE, PCLP, is a Contributing Editor for Microsoft Certified Professional Magazine and a manager at a large IT services firm in Australia. He's the author of Lotus Domino Administration in a Nutshell (O'Reilly and Associates, ISBN 1-56592-717-6). You can reach him at Attn: Greg.
|
|
| |
|
More articles by Greg Neilson:
|
There are 27  user Comments for “The Mystery of Developer Certifications”
|
|
Page 2 of 3
|
| 11/18/00: M says: |
I think that those who say MCSD only needs coding skills have not take a look at the exams already. As Tim J wrote, 70-100 is specially a good exam. Even if you consider 70-176, it requires that you have coding skills and then apply them to the cases in the exam. I think if some one with coding skills in VB or VC but without enough experience takes the exam, the score will be less than 500. |
| 11/20/00: Chuck says: |
As an independent developer with 20 years experience developing on a variety of platforms, I got my MCSD certification last year simply as a additional booster to my already long list of successful system development and implementation projects. I have worked exclusively in the VB/SQL Server/MS Office world for the past 5 years and earn 100% of my income from Microsoft's product line. I agree that employers look first at experience and accomplishments, but the MCSD is IMO the proverbial frosting on the cake. It tells them that for whatever it's worth, you made the effort and got the Microsoft certification. Yes, it took a lot of sacrifice for me and my family to achieve the certification (long hours preparing for exams) but I do intend to do it again when my certification comes up for renewal. After all, my last two children will be in college at the same time in a couple of years so its amazing what you can do with the proper "motivation". Oh yea, I will gross in excess of $115,000 this year. |
| 11/20/00: Graham says: |
I think Greg has it right. Control of the Microsoft certification programs appears to have been transferred to the Microsoft Marketing department, with two aims in sight: - Minimize costs (remove the valuable benefits) - Push sales of current products such as Win2k, VB6 Very sad. |
| 11/20/00: loto says: |
I have my MCSD as well as my MCDBA. And what do I get from Microsoft? A bitmap that I can put on a business card. Bring back the MSDN subscription! Will I continue to update my certifictions? What does Microsoft plan to give me in return? |
| 11/20/00: Michael says: |
Comes down to two reasons; 1. Exams don't just test you on developer tool knowledge but programming style as well. As the "correct" programming style comes down to what the exam writer(s) believe is correct, it isn't necessary the only answer. Further, development exams like the Visual Interdev exam tries to throw in questions that are not related to the tool. This just points to poor exam question analysis and planning. 2. MCSE exams tests you on what a product does and what its capable of doing. MCSD exams tests you on what the underlying technology is. What a product does is largely inherent in an interface. For example, how do you create a user in NT4? USRMGR. How do you create it in Windows 2000? DSA.MSC. While the operating system human interfaces haven't changed all that much. The underlying development technologies have. I guess this also points to how many Microsoft IT professionals actually are hard-core developers. The majority of people I know who writes code for Microsoft platforms are system administrators who dabble in VB and VBScript. They can create an interactive database-driven website and create complex scripts to create users, groups, shares, mailboxes, etc. But if you asked if they ever consider MCSD certification, they shudder at the concept. Perhaps MCSD certification should also add a pathway for these in-between MCSE/MCSD potentials? This track is probably more in line with Lotus CLP who are adept at LotusScript, a good comparison to the VBScript technology. BTW, I fall into this situation myself. |
| 11/22/00: anonymous says: |
I agree with JP anynomous. But, in the other hand, MCSD has enhanced my degrees: MBA and Master of Science in Computer Information System. MCSD definitely completes my degree; Master of Science in CIS, not vice versa. |
| 11/29/00: Eric says: |
Simple - 2 reasons: Less benefits and Why should I mess with VB6 when, with all the radical changes in Visual Studio.NET, I will have to work on it again in less than a year? I am waiting for .NET before I renew it. |
| 11/30/00: Helen says: |
I finally did the last of the 4 exams required for the "new" MCSD this past summer (100). For background's sake, I was one of the first 500 or so MCSE+Internet folks according to published certification stats, WAY back before prep materials other than product were available for required MCSE+I exams like Proxy 2 and IEAK 4.0. I have also taken and passed beta cert exams. (Read: I get my certs the long way, via gaining product expertise and a bit of study of the docs to pick up those traditional "evil details" of new features that tend to show up on exams.) How much stuff irrelevant to my MCSE-related activities did I have to learn to get the MCSE+I? I've never used IEAK in production, so learning about that was mostly a curiosity issue. I've never had to hook an NT network to a Netware network (NT Server/Workstation/SITE exams), because there are lots of IT jobs out there, and I choose to work in environments that do not require me to use Netware systems. I learned the Netware stuff ONLY because I knew I had to know a bit about it, for some of the core exams. I've never had to make some of the registry tweaks I recall seeing on the IIS exam. Other than that, the tests pretty accurately represent the kinds of things I've had to know about these products, in order to work effectively with them, enabling me to solve problems that my non-certified, but still competent, colleagues could not. How much stuff irrelevant to what I do, did I have to learn, to get my MCSD (electives: VB, SQL)? Quite a bit. For example, most of the new VB6 Internet-oriented bells and whistles that were tested on, are irrelevant to anything I see myself doing any time soon. When I do net apps, it's via ASP, perl, or something else other than VB6. Similarly, a lot of the new ADO control whiz-bang stuff is nice for less-experienced programmers, but implementing database apps in code tends to result in better performance and more robust behavior. Additionally, there's a particular approach to database design/normalization which the Solution Requirements (100) exam EXPECTS one to follow if one wants to pass, and although technically valid (even elegant) from a computer science standpoint, it doesn't represent the way most real-world DBA types I know would ever want me to design a database, due to inherent inefficiencies of that approach. Etc. There are SO MANY ways to accomplish the same thing in the development world, that it's really easy to be a great developer in the Windows environment without knowing the specific ways to accomplish things, that are tested on the exams. The emphasis on new features vs. old proven approaches (control-based DB apps vs. hand-coded ones, for example) shows the marketing orientation of the exams, to the exclusion of perfectly valid alternate ways of achieving the same (in some cases, better, IMHO) functionality. Anyone who's been through computer programming classes can relate to the really great coders who squeaked by with C's, because they'd rather code than learn details, and the barely adequate ones with high A's, who could learn details a lot more easily than they could actually put together a logically correct and well-written program. Objective testing of developer skills is just a difficult thing to do. |
| 12/8/00: J.G. says: |
I will tell you something. From the outside of the IT World, looking in towards the certs and stuff. I have seen so many people try to go for their MCSE's just for the money, thinking they are gonna be rich when they finished, it made me sick. I was in the MCSE program, but, I couldn't stand it anymore. People would come into the technical training school that I attend and before they even said a word they would tell them that the MCSE route was the way to go. How are you gonna tell someone that MCSE is the way to go when you have no idea even what they came in for? Just about everyone and their mothers have been talking about MCSE that when I fall asleep at night I have nightmares about MCSE's chasing after me with MS-issued knifes. I couldn't stand it! I dropped out of the class and stuck with concentrating on my B.S. degree in computer science. I still have the credit at the tech school and I'm gonna use it for more practice with C++ and Java/HTML. If I hear another thing about MCSE I'm gonna throw up! |
| 12/13/00: N says: |
Having been an MCSD under Win Arch 1 & 2, I feel I've got to work twice as hard for less... Eliminating the MSDN library and Technet library has made me think twice.. Also why pick core exams, Developers should be able to take any of the elective exams... Microsoft should test on the core elements of development and not renew the track simply to sell new versions of the product. |
First Page Previous Page Next Page Last Page
|
|
|
|
