|
Home > Archive > microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcsd > April 2004 > Why get Certified
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
|
| Hello:
Could you please help me with my research on the benefits
of being an MCSD. I have been a MS developer for few
years now, and I am interested in taking the training.
I do have few questions and if you would to participate
please provide your answers to the following questions:
1) What do you think is the future outlook of one who is
certified as an MCSD?
2) In your opinion, what are the benefits
(advancement,pay,etc...)of being
an MCSD certified?
3)What do you think are the rquired qualifiaction,
experience, training, and education?
If you can provide briefy your contact info that would be
very much appreciated(Please note that your information
will not be abused)
Thank you so much for your time.
Sincerely,
Saad Benateigha
| |
|
| Saad wrote:
> Could you please help me with my research on the benefits
> of being an MCSD.
It's quickly becoming a minimum qualification requirement for many
companies. This is especially true for advanced developer positions.
MCAD is good for entry level programmers, and MCSD is good for medium
to advanced programmers.
I don't think you'll get a lot more pay if you have it, but you might
not get a job if you don't have it.
What do you need to pass the tests? Practical "hands-on" experience is
very helpful, but you should also study some books and web sites. There
isn't a certain number of years needed, but there is a certain amount
of material you need to know. We each learn at a different rate. It
took me a couple months of study (maybe an hour a day) to pass the
70-315. It took about the same for the 70-320.
The Training Guides by Amit Kalani are very good:
http://www.techcontent.com
Eric
| |
| DalePres 2004-04-09, 11:23 pm |
| The biggest benefit is that you'll be a better developer. You will have a
more fully rounded understanding of the languages, the .Net framework, and
the Visual Studio environment. You'll learn new things that you had no idea
you could do.
Then, if the certification doesn't get you a raise, the improvement in your
ability will...either with your current employer or your next.
Dale
"Saad" <saadb@sigmaeconsulting.com> wrote in message
news:148bd01c41c01$6aac7a90$a0
01280a@phx.gbl...
> Hello:
> Could you please help me with my research on the benefits
> of being an MCSD. I have been a MS developer for few
> years now, and I am interested in taking the training.
> I do have few questions and if you would to participate
> please provide your answers to the following questions:
> 1) What do you think is the future outlook of one who is
> certified as an MCSD?
>
> 2) In your opinion, what are the benefits
> (advancement,pay,etc...)of being
> an MCSD certified?
>
> 3)What do you think are the rquired qualifiaction,
> experience, training, and education?
>
> If you can provide briefy your contact info that would be
> very much appreciated(Please note that your information
> will not be abused)
> Thank you so much for your time.
>
> Sincerely,
> Saad Benateigha
>
| |
| UAError 2004-04-10, 3:23 pm |
| "DalePres" <don-t-spa-m-me@lea-ve-me-a-lone--.com> wrote:
>The biggest benefit is that you'll be a better developer.
No it won't. It is simply a technology certification.
If you prepare properly for it, i.e. not relying solely on
testbanks or worse braindumps, it will certainly broaden
your expertise of the .NET technology and the context in
which it can be utilitzed. Broad is the operative word here,
as you may still be lacking in knowledge of many of the
"best practices" of the particular area you where
successfully tested.
For example, you can pass 70-315 and be blissfully unaware
of many of the beneficial practices outlined in
"Real World ASP.NET Best Practices"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=172
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1590591003
You can pass 70-320 and still only know a minimum about
XML, .NET Webservice and associated technologies and have no
clue when the use of Enterprise Service Components is
appropriate.
It does precious little to enhance your capability or
competence when you exercise the craft of software
development in general - how you interact with the user,
client, team. 70-300 tests a very narrow
spectrum of processes and methodologies presented to
date to aid in the successful conduct of a software
development project.
| |
| The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere 2004-04-10, 6:24 pm |
| >It does precious little to enhance your capability or
>competence when you exercise the craft of software
>development in general - how you interact with the user,
>client, team. 70-300 tests a very narrow
>spectrum of processes and methodologies presented to
>date to aid in the successful conduct of a software
>development project.
This is an excellent point as these 'missing topics' account for the
vast majority of the software development process.
Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
| |
| The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere 2004-04-10, 6:24 pm |
| >It's quickly becoming a minimum qualification requirement for many
>companies.
Not from what I see.
Many companies have no idea about ms certs, let alone require them as
part of a selection criteria.
Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
| |
| DalePres 2004-04-10, 8:24 pm |
| Your experience with the certification process is clearly different from
mine. I have held Microsoft certifications for over 7 years now and each
time I study for an exam I learn things I didn't know at before. A lot of
things... Even in topics that I consider myself to be very knowledgeable.
I didn't say that the process would make you know it all.
Perhaps you're not studying the right materials. I assume you do not yet
know it all, or you'd have all your certifications and not be reading these
newsgroups.
Dale
"UAError" <null@null.null> wrote in message
news:gveg709ce49p2o9io90cqs2of
27q1vqpht@4ax.com...
> "DalePres" <don-t-spa-m-me@lea-ve-me-a-lone--.com> wrote:
>
>
> No it won't. It is simply a technology certification.
>
> If you prepare properly for it, i.e. not relying solely on
> testbanks or worse braindumps, it will certainly broaden
> your expertise of the .NET technology and the context in
> which it can be utilitzed. Broad is the operative word here,
> as you may still be lacking in knowledge of many of the
> "best practices" of the particular area you where
> successfully tested.
>
> For example, you can pass 70-315 and be blissfully unaware
> of many of the beneficial practices outlined in
> "Real World ASP.NET Best Practices"
> http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=172
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1590591003
>
> You can pass 70-320 and still only know a minimum about
> XML, .NET Webservice and associated technologies and have no
> clue when the use of Enterprise Service Components is
> appropriate.
>
> It does precious little to enhance your capability or
> competence when you exercise the craft of software
> development in general - how you interact with the user,
> client, team. 70-300 tests a very narrow
> spectrum of processes and methodologies presented to
> date to aid in the successful conduct of a software
> development project.
>
| |
| UAError 2004-04-11, 7:24 pm |
| "DalePres" <don-t-spa-m-me@lea-ve-me-a-lone--.com> wrote:
>Your experience with the certification process is clearly different from
>mine. I have held Microsoft certifications for over 7 years now and each
>time I study for an exam I learn things I didn't know at before. A lot of
>things... Even in topics that I consider myself to be very knowledgeable.
I do not dispute that one learns a lot in preparation for
the certification and that the successful completion of the
certification can be a lot of work.
The original question was:
- "Why get certified"
whereupon your reply was:
- "The biggest benefit is that you'll be a better
developer."
You're certainly entitled to your opinion but IMO the
relationship is actually the other way around.
- The value of the certification ultimately depends on the
level of (pre-existing) competence on the part of the
certification holder.
i.e. the certification is most valuable if you already are a
good software developer, provided you acquired the
certification the "proper" way because now you are able to
employ your pre-existing skills effectively in a .NET
environment and you will require less time to come up to
speed with the technical in-depth issues of the project at
hand. (Guru-dom is still in the far distance).
A "bad" developer can successfully complete certification -
and most likely will still be a "bad" developer who is now
capable of inflicting his deeds on the .NET world.
None of the tests focus on an in-depth examination of your
knowledge of your chosen implementation language, its
features, their proper use, and more importantly its
idiomatic use (language-specific small scale patterns).
None of the tests drive home language-independent best
practices; the evils of duplication (including, but not
limited to, the DRY principle (Do not repeat yourself)); the
paramount importance of clarity of code, foregoing slick
implementation tricks and pre-mature optimizations; the
importance of not using literals in-line but centralizing
their location to the smallest possible number of files;...
etc, etc.
And these are just some issues dealing with implementation
facet of software development. There are more sides to being
a good developer than "just" knowing a programming language
or an implementation technology ... it certainly is a highly
desirable skill but it is not sufficient.
>
>I didn't say that the process would make you know it all.
>
>Perhaps you're not studying the right materials. I assume you do not yet
>know it all, or you'd have all your certifications and not be reading these
>newsgroups.
>
>Dale
| |
| DalePres 2004-04-11, 9:24 pm |
| Like you said... you can be a bad developer with or without certification.
I didn't say certification will make you a good developer. The only way to
become a good developer is study, practice, and learning from the
accumulated experience and knowledge of others. All those things are the
things that you do when you're studying for certification.
You certainly can't be a good developer if you don't know your tools. So if
you haven't done the study required for certification, are you really a good
developer? If you do know your tools, then you have done the study required
for certification, whether or not the book you studied from said anything
about certification on the cover.
Dale
"UAError" <null@null.null> wrote in message
news:l9ij70p6p9kqaht6bjc6e6rhq
nhmgnau4u@4ax.com...
> "DalePres" <don-t-spa-m-me@lea-ve-me-a-lone--.com> wrote:
>
>
> I do not dispute that one learns a lot in preparation for
> the certification and that the successful completion of the
> certification can be a lot of work.
>
> The original question was:
>
> - "Why get certified"
>
> whereupon your reply was:
>
> - "The biggest benefit is that you'll be a better
> developer."
>
> You're certainly entitled to your opinion but IMO the
> relationship is actually the other way around.
>
> - The value of the certification ultimately depends on the
> level of (pre-existing) competence on the part of the
> certification holder.
>
> i.e. the certification is most valuable if you already are a
> good software developer, provided you acquired the
> certification the "proper" way because now you are able to
> employ your pre-existing skills effectively in a .NET
> environment and you will require less time to come up to
> speed with the technical in-depth issues of the project at
> hand. (Guru-dom is still in the far distance).
>
> A "bad" developer can successfully complete certification -
> and most likely will still be a "bad" developer who is now
> capable of inflicting his deeds on the .NET world.
>
> None of the tests focus on an in-depth examination of your
> knowledge of your chosen implementation language, its
> features, their proper use, and more importantly its
> idiomatic use (language-specific small scale patterns).
>
> None of the tests drive home language-independent best
> practices; the evils of duplication (including, but not
> limited to, the DRY principle (Do not repeat yourself)); the
> paramount importance of clarity of code, foregoing slick
> implementation tricks and pre-mature optimizations; the
> importance of not using literals in-line but centralizing
> their location to the smallest possible number of files;...
> etc, etc.
>
> And these are just some issues dealing with implementation
> facet of software development. There are more sides to being
> a good developer than "just" knowing a programming language
> or an implementation technology ... it certainly is a highly
> desirable skill but it is not sufficient.
>
these[color=blue]
>
>
| |
| The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere 2004-04-12, 6:24 am |
| >The only way to
>become a good developer is study, practice, and learning from the
>accumulated experience and knowledge of others.
Correct. Add to that ' in a real world environment'.
>All those things are the
>things that you do when you're studying for certification.
You're missing the point UAError made!
As UAError as already said, the exams do NOT cover the real issues
which account for 80-90% of what is involved in the real world
development process. The vb & c# exams don't even require you to have
good grasp of the language as both the exams concentrate of the dot
framework and related microsoft technologies, and result in the exams
being almost the same for each corresponding exam.
Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
| |
|
| The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere wrote:
>
> Not from what I see.
>
> Many companies have no idea about ms certs, let alone require them as
> part of a selection criteria.
>
> Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
Tech-oriented headhunters are often aware of the certifications and
they normally ask people what certs they have.
I think certs are much more important now than they were several years
ago.
Some of this has to do with the economy. Companies can't hire as many
people as they might like, so they have to be very choosy about who
they hire. At least the good companies are choosy!
It also helps to weed down the number of applicants. Nobody wants to
interview 50 people for one job opening.
Eric
| |
| The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere 2004-04-12, 3:24 pm |
| >I think certs are much more important now than they were several years
>ago.
I would disagree, clearly you see things differently. But it's
certainly not what I see, and I see things from both sides of the
Atlantic...
>Companies can't hire as many
>people as they might like, so they have to be very choosy about who
>they hire.
Very true.
From my company's prospective business knowledge is far more important
than being able to slurt out the latest buzz words. That's not too say
they would employ non-technically experienced people, far from it.
>At least the good companies are choosy!
Quite right too!
>It also helps to weed down the number of applicants. Nobody wants to
>interview 50 people for one job opening.
That's easily done; just target you're advertising in the right area,
i.e. trade press related to your business.
Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
| |
| UAError 2004-04-12, 6:24 pm |
| "DalePres" <don-t-spa-m-me@lea-ve-me-a-lone--.com> wrote:
>Like you said... you can be a bad developer with or without certification.
>I didn't say certification will make you a good developer. The only way to
>become a good developer is study, practice, and learning from the
>accumulated experience and knowledge of others. All those things are the
>things that you do when you're studying for certification.
>
>You certainly can't be a good developer if you don't know your tools. So if
>you haven't done the study required for certification, are you really a good
>developer? If you do know your tools, then you have done the study required
>for certification, whether or not the book you studied from said anything
>about certification on the cover.
>
>Dale
>
I was simply trying to temper the statement:
"The biggest benefit is that you'll be a better developer."
I've been watching this newsgroup for several months now and
it seems that a significant portion of the traffic (aside
from the MCNGP's) is generated by people looking for an
entry level position in I.T., right after school. They tend
to grab a statement like the above and run with it. Given
the opportunity cost of pursuing certification these
individuals would be much better advised to do something
else to become "better developers", something that allows
them to reap rewards much quicker and acquire skill of more
immediate relevance; even a 4 year bachelor curriculum just
gets things started. The crux is that there is no
certification to prove that you are a good developer.
Ultimately a candidate has to successfully manipulate the
situation so that she/he gets an interview with the person
who is familiar with the requirements of the position to be
filled, to get an opportunity to show off relevant skills.
Granted that is not easy … but I don't think (MSCD.NET)
certification is the answer.
Even for an experienced developer pursuit of certification
represents an opportunity cost as he/she spends time on
acquiring "perishable" knowledge - time which could be spent
on extending one's skills in a more long term fashion. But
all sorts of reasons can justify the choice.
IMO, if you look at MSF's team roles, the MCSD.NET
certification fits best with the development management
(architect) role. Looking at the remaining development roles
even an MCAD could be considered overkill because it
provides too much breadth while not guaranteeing sufficient
depth for a specific role. Ideally the development manager
(with the MCSD.NET) would monitor and assess the
contributions of the remaining development team so that
"re-inventing of the wheel" would be curtailed and more
appropriate mechanisms available in the framework would be
pointed out to less experienced developers. However this can
only work if the development manager is 100% committed to a
single project - something that is very rare for individuals
acting in the "architect" position.
Ironically if an architect operates in a medium to large
organization even the knowledge acquired through the
(MCSD.NET) certification process isn't sufficient, as the
corporation will most likely have a heterogeneous I.T.
infrastructure not solely based on MS technologies. Granted,
in large projects a development manager would be assigned to
each feature team, where some teams would only use MS
technology - but some basic knowledge of the non-MS systems
you are interacting with would still be desirable.
Ultimately requiring a MCAD/MCSD.NET for an entry level
position is just silly. Not that it ever stopped employers
and recruiters in the past from requiring a laundry-list of
disparate skills, containing all the latest buzz-words they
could muster. By the time that new hire is in a position to
fully utilize the assets of the certification, the
certification itself will have been replaced once if not
twice, completely eroding the investment in the initial
certification.
| |
| The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere 2004-04-13, 3:24 pm |
| >I've been watching this newsgroup for several months now and
>it seems that a significant portion of the traffic (aside
>from the MCNGP's) is generated by people looking for an
>entry level position in I.T., right after school.
The vast majority of 'traffic' is generated by clueless XXXXwits who
should not be let anywhere near a terminal, even a dumb one!
Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3
|
|
|
|
|