* Jonathan Stowe ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> >
> > The important thing from my POV is that its not learning tree
> > from day one, as they will simply want to say - taking learning
> > tree course Perl101 means people get core competency and it
> > would become the usual noddy thing. Involving them later when
> > the forum was established would give them slightly less
> > clout.
> >
>
> Absolutely right. To bring Learning Tree (or any other Commercial
> Training House ) would mean we would prbably be compelled to go along with
> what they already teach - which may or may not be any good as far as we
> are concerned - after all they have a whole bunch invested in training
> materials and existing trainers which they are not going to give up easily
> ...
>
>
> Possibly a first step would be to work out how to certify the certifiers
> as it were ...
>
I think a lot of this will be about signing up to a charter or code
of conduct. What we will need is an actual exam, i was thinking about
this last night, and my thoughts were to write a web interface were
certified certifiers could request 10 tests, by filling the names
of the recipients in first. Then a script would select questions
from a database of categorised questions and make up a PDF seperately
for each of the recipients, the certifier would then supervise
the recipient completing the test in the allotted time and afterwards
they would mark it and return it (original hardcopy) to the main body.
This main body may check one or two, more to ensure that their
is consistency across certifiers, and assuming that the tests
were all fine, the certifier would get a nice shiny PDF for each
of the recipients of the test.
--
Greg McCarroll http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net
