DISCLAIMER:  I do not speak for LPI in any professional capacity with
regards to Objective or Exam Development, and I have not been involved with
the BSD effort.  This is an individual, peer member response as someone who
has been associated with LPI for 18 years (since 2003 March), but I'll do
my best to get this in the hands of others ... especially since I'm an
'outsider' on the BSD effort myself.


On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 6:25 AM Ottavio Caruso via lpi-examdev <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
> This is neither a rant nor a complaint. It's just me thinking out loud.
> Feel free to ignore or comment. Brutal honesty is welcome.
>

Actually, I think this is outstanding feedback, and very constructive.  If
I may be so bold, I'm going to put forth the view that you feel BSD
possibly has the perception of being the 'adopted redheaded stepchild' of
LPI?  If I've nailed it from your vantage, then there are probably at least
some others who feel that way too.

As soon as the BSD Specialist exam was announced (October 2019),


Just for completeness, as noted in the FAQ, the relationship with LPI
begins at the end of 2017. [6]

QUOTE:  'BSD Certification Group (BSDCG) merged with Linux Professional
Institute in late December 2017.  LPI established a BSD Advisory Committee
and created the Linux Professional Institute BSD Specialist certification. '

Now in full awareness, there are only three (3) questions/answers in the
FAQ.  Please do suggest what other questions should be covered in the FAQ.
If you have them, then I'm sure others do.  In fact -- again being more of
an 'outsider' to the BSD effort -- I'm formulating a couple myself right
now.  ;)

Which brings me to ...

I started preparing myself for this certification. No official prep
> materials had been released, so I used an old wiki [1] for the now
> defunct BSD Associate certification [2] from the equally defunct BSD
> Certification Group [3].
>

Hence the perception.  Whether seemingly true or not to others, the fact
that you feel this way indicates LPI's messaging could be improved.  I have
not been involved with the parties, but just so I am not ignorant of
perceptions, I'd like to hear more.

I should have gone for the exam last year, and if I had done it, I'd
> not have come here and moan about it, but we had a hard lockdown here
> in UK and most test centres shut for good. So I thought, let's use
> this time to study even harder.

Now that some centres are re-opening, I am no longer sure why I should
> invest almost £200 (exam fee + VAT + currency conversion fees) for a
> certification that nobody knows of and the LPI clearly doesn't believe
> in.
>

I wouldn't say the latter.  Although I wasn't involved, I was aware of
several efforts by both sides to bring the BSD certification to LPI so it
could be -- from what I saw -- stewarded far more better, more effectively
and to a larger audience, with LPI's name behind it.  Which brings me to
...

The wiki (on which the exam is based) is full of errors;


You can find the official LPI Exam 702 BSD Specialty objectives here. [4]
These will be updated from the old BSD Cert Group.

Furthermore, you'll find the LPI-BSD 2017-2019 efforts, pre-release 1.0,
here for historical review. [5]

And since this is the ExamDev list, I'm more than willing to spend some
time going over both the pre-LPI BSD and now LPI-BSD era objectives and
other information.
I'm quite dated on BSD, but I have been published around BSD in the past
(e.g., BSD Appendix in old, circa 2000, 'Samba Unleashed' -- although it
was 'last second' and had some typos).

Again, I offer this as a 'fellow peer,' even if I may be inferior to your
knowledge on BSD, I'll do my best to help you get in contact with other
resources.
E.g., I fully expect Fabian (head of exam development) to weigh in on this
thread as well.  ;)


> there are still no prep materials; it's a dead end certification because it
> doesn't lead to any other certification, unlike the LPIC;


Per the FAQ, the aforementioned 'dead end' is by the design of the
'specialist' title. [6]
E.g., LPI also offers the 'specialist' role for DevOps as well, one-n-done
too.

Again, from my 18+ years of experience with LPI (since 2003 March), LPI
takes Job Task Analysis (JTA) seriously.
If there is a demand, LPI will make it happen as best as it can with the
resources available.

And in that regard, your input and possibly even participation is greatly
appreciated!


> the original members of the  BSD Certification Group are no longer working
> on this
> certification;


Correct, LPI has taken over, and Febian et al. head up this exam's
development.
I'll check with him on the next, planned revision timetable (he might
already have one, but I've been so busy I haven't reviewed all his
materials, of which he liberally shares with us).


> there is zero feedback on this certification: I still have to hear of
> anyone who has gone for it.
>

Again, even if that's just a perception issue, it's one I'd like to see
addressed.  I have to admit, as a peer, I don't know anyone else who has it
... although I personally know of over a dozen of people who have taken an
interest in it when LPI first announced the merger.

What does the future hold for the BSD Specialist? If the LPI doesn't
> really believe in its potential, is it not just better to retire it?
>

Oh, LPI believes in the cert, but -- again -- as a 'specialty,' it is an
one-n-done at this time.
If a JTA identifies more in the future, you can be assured -- at least from
my 18+ years experience of watching LPI (even while working for Red Hat for
a decade) -- they will do their best to bring resources to bear, if
feasible.

- bjs

Provided references:

[1] http://bsdwiki.reedmedia.net/wiki/
> [2] http://bsdcertification.org/certification/bsd-associate.html
> [3] http://bsdcertification.org/index.html
>

NEW REFERENCES (and 3x FAQ quotes):

[4] LPI Exam 702: BSD Specialist (Official)
 - https://www.lpi.org/our-certifications/exam-702-objectives

[5] LPI Exam 702 - Objectives V1.0 development (2017-2019, historical)
 - https://wiki.lpi.org/wiki/BSD_Specialist_Objectives_V1.0

[6] LPI FAQ - BSD Specialist Certification FAQ
- https://www.lpi.org/about-lpi/frequently-asked-questions

Q1:  What is the relationship between BSD Specialist certification and BSD
Certification Group?
A1:  BSD Certification Group (BSDCG) merged with Linux Professional
Institute in late December 2017. LPI established a BSD Advisory Committee
and created the Linux Professional Institute BSD Specialist certification.
As our certifications are updated and new ones are created, we will ensure
that BSD coverage is well represented where appropriate.

Q2:  Are there any prerequisites to become BSD Specialists?
A2:  There are no prerequisites for the BSD Specialist. Candidates are
advised to carefully review the objectives and use the list of topics as a
learning guide.

Q3:  Can I use BSD Specialist to advance from LPIC-1 to LPIC-2, or from
LPIC-2 to LPIC-3?
A3:  No, the Linux Professional Institute BSD Specialist certification is
not part of LPI’s Linux certification track and cannot be used to obtain or
extend an LPIC-1/-2/-3 certification. BSD Specialist is part of the Open
Technology Program.


-- 
Bryan J Smith  -  http://www.linkedin.com/in/bjsmith
E-mail:  b.j.smith at ieee.org  or  me at bjsmith.me
_______________________________________________
lpi-examdev mailing list
[email protected]
https://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev

Reply via email to