Re: [Boston.pm] Certification

2005-03-01 Thread James Freeman
Here, here... The perl community already has a certification that matters and would convince any PHB that the person they were hiring was a good candidate. The Perl Advocacy question is a separate one for reasons I will show below. In short our current certification goes like this,

RE: [Boston.pm] Certification

2005-03-01 Thread John Redford
First, I would like to compliment and express broad general agreement with everything James Freeman said in his response to the following message. Second, I would like to express specific agreement with Adam Turoff's expression of the crux of the problem. Expressing agreement takes much less

Re: [Boston.pm] certification

2005-02-28 Thread Tom Metro
Bogart Salzberg wrote: How about an intermediate step: self-testing. Others have already mentioned Brainbench. 3 or 4 years ago I actually saw a few Perl programmer resumes with Brainbench certifications listed. I'm sure if a bunch of Perl people wanted to write a better test, Brainbench would

Re: [Boston.pm] certification

2005-02-28 Thread Aaron Sherman
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 15:39, Tom Metro wrote: As others have argued on the list, as programmers we know certifications are pointless as a technical qualification, but we're not the audience that needs to be convinced otherwise. I disagree. A certification says that you have a certain

Re: [Boston.pm] certification

2005-02-28 Thread Bogart Salzberg
Tom Metro wrote: It would be a start, though I'm not so sure that Brainbench's web-based, open book tests are close enough to a certification to have the intended effect. A self-testing program *need not* suck. Here are four reasons why a home-grown testing program would be (could be) better