|
Home > Archive > microsoft.public.cert.mcdba > February 2003 > MCDBA + ???
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]
|
|
| chris 2003-02-20, 12:23 pm |
| I am currently a MCDBA on sql 7.0 and winnt 4.0. I was going to upgrade it
to the 2k version but now Im thinking it may be better to pursure something
in addition to my current cert instead since all my experience is already in
2000. I dont want to do any programming outside of sql. Does anyone have any
ideas what would be good in addition to what Ive got? Including other than
the MS certs?
Thanks in advance.
Chris
| |
|
| "chris" <chris@fin2000.com> wrote in message
news:uBK6hcQ2CHA.2156@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I am currently a MCDBA on sql 7.0 and winnt 4.0. I was going to upgrade it
> to the 2k version
Believe it or not, MS would say you're already a certified "MCDBA on
Microsoft SQL Server 2000". Go look at your transcript:
https://partnering.one.microsoft.co...tools/trans.asp
> but now Im thinking it may be better to pursure something
> in addition to my current cert instead since all my experience is already
in
> 2000. I dont want to do any programming outside of sql. Does anyone have
any
> ideas what would be good in addition to what Ive got? Including other than
> the MS certs?
I'd recommend looking into learning about other database servers - mostly
Oracle and/or DB2. Oracle has certification exams for PL/SQL, though the
other exams to complete an OCP certification really won't be of much value
until you do actual work with an Oracle server. But their SQL version has
some features that MS T-SQL doesn't, and vice versa. I assume DB2 is
similar, but really don't know any specifics about that system.
I think the Oracle exams are much simpler & easier than MS exams (especially
the SQL Server ones). The questions are relatively brief and abstract,
focusing more on knowing the correct commands & syntax.
I think it might give you a worthwhile perspective on alternate ways of
doing things, and it would obviously be very useful if you ever get the
opportunity to work on one of those other systems.
And if you haven't already read Ken Henderson's "Guru's Guide to T-SQL", you
should definitely do that.
| |
| Jacco Schalkwijk 2003-02-20, 4:23 pm |
| You can still expand into MCSD, even if you don't want to do any programming
outside SQL server (same goes for me).
- The analyzing requirements exam 70-100 is mostly datamodelling so that is
a good one to have under your belt (don't buy the MSPress book for this
exam, it's useless). Don't know about the .Net version, but that's released
pretty soon and I'm going to do that, if only because I get a free voucher.
- The next version of SQL Server will allow you to use .NET languages inside
stored procedures, so it's good to get a bit of a head start with VB.NET or
C#
- There's one exam about XML now, and it definitly doesn't hurt to know some
more about that as well.
And it's good to have some inside into what the application developers are
up to, usually though so you can refute some weird ideas that will
absolutely wreck database performance.
"chris" <chris@fin2000.com> wrote in message
news:uBK6hcQ2CHA.2156@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I am currently a MCDBA on sql 7.0 and winnt 4.0. I was going to upgrade it
> to the 2k version but now Im thinking it may be better to pursure
something
> in addition to my current cert instead since all my experience is already
in
> 2000. I dont want to do any programming outside of sql. Does anyone have
any
> ideas what would be good in addition to what Ive got? Including other than
> the MS certs?
>
> Thanks in advance.
> Chris
>
>
| |
| Alan Davis 2003-02-21, 3:23 am |
| >I think the Oracle exams are much simpler & easier than MS exams (especially
>the SQL Server ones). The questions are relatively brief and abstract,
>focusing more on knowing the correct commands & syntax.
Obviously you have not been put through the Oracle master dba
certification process.
| |
|
| "Alan Davis" <T> wrote in message
news:5crb5vo8qe6qia3d8rkuuq8m8
e1fropbev@4ax.com...
> >I think the Oracle exams are much simpler & easier than MS exams
(especially
> >the SQL Server ones). The questions are relatively brief and abstract,
> >focusing more on knowing the correct commands & syntax.
>
> Obviously you have not been put through the Oracle master dba
> certification process.
No, it hadn't even gone live when I did my Oracle certifications (last
summer), though many plans for it were already public. I have been put
through the Oracle exams for OCP-DBA for 8i and 9i and I think they're
relatively crude compared to current MS exams. The SQL 6.5 exams were
similar in focusing mainly on regurgitating rote facts with little or no
context for practical application of the information. The types of questions
are covered by "Bloom's Taxonomy", which basically categorizes 6 levels of
knowledge. Questions that test at the higher levels are usually better
measurements and also more readily accepted as good measurements of real
world skills.
I think the Oracle 8i and 9i exam questions are primarily at the lowest
level in Bloom's heirarchy (knowledge) and the MS SQL 2000 exam questions
are almost all spread among the top 4 levels (application, analysis,
synthesis, evaluation). Lab based certifications are generally highly valued
because they will almost necessarily also require demonstration at those
levels by the tester. And the distinction is more readily apparent even to
someone who's never heard of Bloom's taxonomy, which is certainly a very
valuable thing.
I think it's pretty interesting stuff - google searches for "Bloom's
Taxonomy" and "psychometrics" will turn up lots of related information.
| |
| Alan Davis 2003-02-21, 4:23 pm |
| >I have been put
>through the Oracle exams for OCP-DBA for 8i and 9i and I think they're
>relatively crude compared to current MS exams.
As far as I am concern most of the ms exams are 'crude'. Any type of
exam that fails to ascertain whether or not the taker actually
understands the question (as well as 'answering' correctly) is rather
pointless. The questions should ask for the takers reasoning for their
answers.
Example ADO 2.x question: -
Which would be the most efficient cursor to use in XXXXX situation?
Explain your reasoning and describe a situation in which the use of
this cursor type would NOT be appropriate.
However this type of question and answer could never be achieved by
the multi-choice format currently conducted as it would require a
'human being' to mark it.
>The types of questions
>are covered by "Bloom's Taxonomy", which basically categorizes 6 levels of
>knowledge. Questions that test at the higher levels are usually better
>measurements and also more readily accepted as good measurements of real
>world skills.
A good reason (as you say), for lab based tests.
| |
|
| "Alan Davis" <T> wrote in message
news:248d5v48befvd3rnnn60bhqd1
panc2fds0@4ax.com...
> >I have been put
> >through the Oracle exams for OCP-DBA for 8i and 9i and I think they're
> >relatively crude compared to current MS exams.
>
> As far as I am concern most of the ms exams are 'crude'. Any type of
> exam that fails to ascertain whether or not the taker actually
> understands the question (as well as 'answering' correctly) is rather
> pointless. The questions should ask for the takers reasoning for their
> answers.
>
> Example ADO 2.x question: -
>
> Which would be the most efficient cursor to use in XXXXX situation?
> Explain your reasoning and describe a situation in which the use of
> this cursor type would NOT be appropriate.
Have you seen the Oracle exams? You seem to be comparing MS exams to an
ideal. I'm comparing them to the Oracle 8i and 9i OCP-DBA exams.
A typical Oracle style question along those lines might be:
Which cursor type uses the least space in tempdb?
A) STATIC
B) MINIMAL_TEMPDB
C) DYNAMIC
D) KEYSET
See the difference? No 'situation', no having to weigh tradeoffs of
simplicity vs. efficiency or even understand if using space in tempdb is
good, bad, or inconsequential in any circumstances. The *majority* of the
Oracle questions I saw were precisely as in depth as that made up example.
If your point is just "Well, I still think they stink", that's fine but I
think the quality of recent MS exam questions is significantly better than
those Oracle exams, or even other MS exams from just a few years ago.
> However this type of question and answer could never be achieved by
> the multi-choice format currently conducted as it would require a
> 'human being' to mark it.
But a test doesn't have to involve subjective evaluation in order to measure
high level understanding. And requiring human evaluation introduces a great
deal of new problems with inconsistencies. It's actually more reliable to
ask a larger number of objectively scored questions - it pretty quickly
becomes statistically unrealistic for anyone to pass by guessing correct
answers that he doesn't really understand.
> >The types of questions
> >are covered by "Bloom's Taxonomy", which basically categorizes 6 levels
of
> >knowledge. Questions that test at the higher levels are usually better
> >measurements and also more readily accepted as good measurements of real
> >world skills.
>
> A good reason (as you say), for lab based tests.
You incorrectly imply that lab based exams are the only or best way to test
at the higher levels of understanding. Multiple choice exams, when
rigorously designed and tested, are also very capable of doing so. It's a
pretty scientific process - probably moreso than software development or
database design are yet.
| |
| Alan Davis 2003-02-22, 5:23 am |
| >Have you seen the Oracle exams?
Mute point! I was to sign up for a company, who as part of my contract
of employment, were to put me through the 9i master dba certification.
I don't think they understand the costs involved, as when they found
out, they crossed out this part of the contract so it never went
through.
>A typical Oracle style question along those lines might be:
>Which cursor type uses the least space in tempdb?
>A) STATIC
>B) MINIMAL_TEMPDB
>C) DYNAMIC
>D) KEYSET
>
>See the difference? No 'situation', no having to weigh tradeoffs of
>simplicity vs. efficiency or even understand if using space in tempdb is
>good, bad, or inconsequential in any circumstances. The *majority* of the
>Oracle questions I saw were precisely as in depth as that made up example.
>If your point is just "Well, I still think they stink", that's fine but I
>think the quality of recent MS exam questions is significantly better than
>those Oracle exams, or even other MS exams from just a few years ago.
And is utterly pointless too, so we agree.
It does not matter which company the 'exam' is for, those types of
exams can be inaccurate - the dump sites have helped see (although not
ensured on their own) to that.
>But a test doesn't have to involve subjective evaluation in order to measure
>high level understanding. And requiring human evaluation introduces a great
>deal of new problems with inconsistencies.
Yes it should. The exam taker should be able to demonstrate the
required level of understand of the subject. Simply choosing from a
list does prove the candidate has this understanding. After all a
'choose one from four' type question, gives someone who has no
understanding a one in four chance of getting the mark. With many of
the ms questions, anyone with a little savvy can increase that
percentage through elimination.
>It's actually more reliable to
>ask a larger number of objectively scored questions - it pretty quickly
>becomes statistically unrealistic for anyone to pass by guessing correct
>answers that he doesn't really understand.
I see, just like those psychometric tests, where by the same
questions are rephrased and ask over and over again in order to deduce
the 'true' answer? mad..
>You incorrectly imply that lab based exams are the only or best way to test
No.
Not 'only', as well as. I think the approach taken by Oracle in their
master dba is fair enough. This certification approach includes multi
choice type tests, 'must attend' courses and lab tests. It would
appear to me that Oracle wish for quality people to be produced from
their program, while ms wish for quantity. In the UK an mcdba cert
mean very little, while an Oracle 9i dba master certification does.
Even if ms adopted a two exam approach, one multi choice, the other
written (say on the lines of the Prince 2 certification), the worth of
the certification would become much more improved.
What I want is improved status of my ms certs. This will not happen
while companies see them as worthless.
How a good weekend
|
|
|
|
|