Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Certification only; stay out of training :-)
Sorry the rant was not clear; I expect the test taker to be proficient at QGIS. I was just taking the time to describe how the test would be different from a normal certification test. The actual testing criteria would need to be set by those offering training courses; or perhaps by the QGIS PMC? My own take is that: 1) The vast majority of the test would be devoted to using the application; covering common GIS tasks; and a few advanced ones to get a spread - I assume the visual results could be added as attachments for review. - I would expect many of the questions to be of the form "download the natural earth countries" and produce this visual; send us your qgis project file for review - Or here is a range of web services publishing world health organisation; answer the following questions 2) I assume a certification program would have a number of levels. - I would only think of someone building the system from scratch to apply to a server product like GeoServer or MapServer where a user needs to apply a security fix *now* (if you are certified you should not have to hire a consultant or wait for the next nightly build - grab the patch from the issue tracker and get the servers back online!) 3) Even for the "skills and knowledge in using the product in question" we would need to cover familiarity with how to communicate and where to find answers. - I would expect the test to cover material beyond that in the training course requiring test taker to use the website correctly; possibly to look up information on an older version of QGIS? - You may also wish to have them check the SLD specification to show that they know where the OGC docs are? This could even be by way of updating an SLD file to be compatible with an older version of QGIS that does not support the interpolate function from SE? - As for how to handle this - perhaps asking test takers to submit resources used during the test (and explain that they are part of the content being tested). It is a little bit more difficult if QGIS supports an IRC channel; perhaps they could attach IRC logs. Still the above discussion is one for the group setting the certification criteria; I was more interested in the foundation (as a rule) stress the open source and community involvement side of certification. In part so that those earning certification are actually useful to their employers. -- Jody Garnett On Monday, 13 June 2011 at 10:40 PM, Stephen Woodbridge wrote: > Jody, > > What are you trying to certify the test taker is proficient at? > > The above seems to focus on OpenSource developemt skills, but I would > think that QGIS v1 certification should be more focused on how > proficient that take is with QGIS v1. So there is probably two levels of > skill that the test should identify. > > 1. skill and knowledge in using the product in question > 2. skill and knowledge in developing and product process of development > said product > > -Steve > ___ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org (mailto:Discuss@lists.osgeo.org) > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Edu] Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Training and certification
All, My thoughts on the Incubation process (which are in the archives over the years) was generally that it was too big a step in many cases for projects to take. I've always wondered about some sort of process that could last much longer and with many more steps in it before being declared fully matured. I've also wondered a bit about how to monitor these matured projects after the back. It seems like smaller certification steps/chunks could help here as well. You wouldn't need to require a full review of the whoile incubation process for example. This allows the community much more time to feel out and discuss a project and it's workings as well as an opportunity to guide the process where possible. The all or nothing option of the Incubation process has bothered me from day one. It also allows for at least, a rudimentary (public) history to be captured of a projects as it's developed. bobb >>> Jody Garnett wrote: Interaction with other committees is separate to the the incubation process currently. I like the idea of the straight up reward system: - participation (provision of quick start etc gets you included on the live dvd) - provision of course materials perhaps could allow projects to participate in education initiatives The incubation process is already a MASSIVE ask. Just because it is one that has had some success please do not look at it as an opportunity to ask more from participating projects. As an example: "incubation" took GeoTools years to accomplish - and is taking many other projects years as well. Please don't add more work to a process already so slow is is ineffective. Is there any way to start these conversations off in the other direct? That is how can the live dvd project bring assistance to bear; or the education committee bring volunteers together to write course materials? Remember that these projects have one (and only one primary objective): bringing code together into releasable form :-) -- Jody Garnett On Sunday, 12 June 2011 at 10:56 AM, Mark Lucas wrote: On Jun 11, 2011, at 8:24 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote: Mark, Yes I agree that OSGeo-Live also provides a good framework for the periodic review of projects beyond incubation. What we have on our side is: 1. A periodic release schedule 2. A valuable business driver which attracts projects to continue to work on OSGeo-Live (namely the marketing value of each release) We do have the potential to gradually introduce review of incubation criteria into the OSGeo-Live release cycle. I was actually thinking of the reverse - incubation graduation would be contingent on getting on the OSGeo-Live disk. Agree it should be gradual, should start out as a goal. Mark ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Certification only; stay out of training :-)
On 6/13/2011 4:41 AM, Jody Garnett wrote: Indeed the main benefit of certification here would be as an income draw to keep OSGeo going. This is also interesting: currently we are using the surplus from courses to partly finance our (mainly QGIS) development. I do not think redirecting these resources to OSGeo would be a clever think to do. There is scope for competition between OSGeo and individual project, which is no good. I don't think anybody is interested in the foundation competing with existing training courses. (Indeed training is one of the few places where any cost recovery on the udig project occurs). That said if you don't want OSGeo competing in training - how would you like to pay for the foundation? I am not sure if your organisation sponsors OSGeo? I don't think my employer does (preferring to volunteer marketing effort); and I don't personally sponsor the foundation (preferring volunteer effort myself). So this is the nice part about certification: - it would make your training courses stronger (ie more attractive to customers) - it makes training an easier thing to sell (take training as one step towards getting ready for certification) - it would make QGIS more attractive (as a technology in which certification was available) - it provides the foundation with a revenue stream that does not compete with any of the member organisations (Indeed certification is a "service" that very few organisations could offer credibly?) From the QGIS standpoint the benefit for you really is focused on those first couple of points; certifications would be an additional activity the foundation could perform that would make your training courses more valuable. My own thoughts on this (using your project as an example): 1. Testing criteria - organisations offering QGSI training are asked to supply criteria to use for the certification process (If your organisation wants to be involved this is where you would take part) - the foundation pays for someone to write the test material for a specific qgis release (perhaps you? perhaps another vendor?) - the test is passed around to those supplying QGIS certification criteria for review; production of an answer key etc... 2. Next time you do a training course - offer your customer the option of either: a) taking the certification tests at a later date (you can pass on the foundation contact details; and get a 30% cut in thanks for the referral) b) arranging for a "bulk purchase" where you can offer your customer a discount for doing it then and their (perhaps give the customer a 20% discount to make it more attractive). You would need to play with the numbers to make this attractive (so customers don't just ordering the test for their top people). 3. Each month the foundation hires one of the organisation that defined the testing criteria to mark the tests a) a month is chosen to have enough tests together in one spot to make effective use of time b) the organisation hired should be a set rotation to be "fair" c) the organisation hired should probably not be responsible for the training of any of the students being marked in order to keep this as independent as possible 4. Marking should be brutal a) the idea is to force a spread so that potential employers can actually respect the certification b) cover open source activities (bug submission, contribution to documentation, participation on the user list). If it is any kind of advanced certification this goes into building the application from source code, applying a patch and building locally (can submit a screen snap of the result), links to accepted submissions etc... c) How brutal? How about if they get everything right they end up with 80%; the last 10% is there to allow markers to recognise "outstanding" d) if you really want to soften the blow you can provide different levels of certification out of the same test (confusion may not be worth it; easier to fail people and ask them to try again) 5. Updates to certification should be cheaper and repeatable a) as each release comes out the certification criteria should be updated b) a cheaper rate for "repeat customers" should be available - to encourage this both as a revenue stream - and as a certification process that employers can trust to be update to date. Why hire someone certified in QGIS 1.6 when QGIS 3 has been released? c) the cheaper rate should also be available to those repeating the same test (partly to soften the blow due to the expected failure rate) The other scenario for using the certification tests is: 3) Next time you hire someone a) Buy a "bulk purchase" of tests b) Ask applicants to take the test; and submit review (this is nice for them because it is on your dime; and nice for you as you get an objective evaluation) c) The foundation arranges for someone to mark this pronto as part of the service; probably only returning details on the top five candidates d) The foundation could change more to access test results in detail
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Help Collecting 2010 Annual Reports for the OSGeo Journal
Just to follow up on this Landon: I was going to raise a "issue" for the geotools project to mark annual report down as a task. Do you have any details, or deadlines which I can fill in? Or should I wait for someone to contact me. Jody On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 3:53 AM, Sunburned Surveyor < sunburned.surve...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Jody. > > I will check the main wiki page and will update my tables using the > information found there. I look forward to getting the report from the > Geotools Team. > > Landon > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Jody Garnett > wrote: > >> Jody wrote: "The OSGeo projects each have a project officer; this is > >> the official point of contact for the board - and for other committees > >> and osgeo activities such as the annual reports." > >> > >> Thanks for letting me know. I wasn't aware of this. Do you know where > >> I find the list of project officers? Does the same thing apply to > >> sponsors and local chapters, or is this just for software projects? > > > > This is just for official projects; part of the graduation process is > > nominating a project officer to facilitate communication etc. I presume > each > > committee has a chair you could contact in a similar capacity? > > > >> > >> The people listed on the wiki page are already working on the journal > >> team and have some relationship with the chapter or software project. > >> The tables on the wiki page were intended to help the journal team > >> keep track of things related to the annual report, not to sow > >> widespread confusion among the other parts of OSGeo. > > > > No worries. > >> > >> I'd like some help to figure out if I'm missing a software > >> project, sponsor, or local chapter from my list. > > > > Sorry for the miss understanding. > >> > >> If there is another place to get that information, then I apologize > >> for pestering. > > > > > > My understanding is the main page of the wiki is good: > > - http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Main_Page > > It includes a link to the software projects (and the officer for each > > project): > > - http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Project_Steering_Committees > >> > >> Please keep in mind that it is a major project to track > >> down annual report information from all our moving parts. > >> > > I agree - a massive effort to try and track people down (thank you for > the > > hard work). > > Jody > > PS. I will see that the issue is raised in the GeoTools issue tracker and > > send you the link. > > > > ___ > > Discuss mailing list > > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > > > ___ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Certification only; stay out of training :-)
Thanks for putting up with my rant(s); I gave up on email and assembled this stuff into a blog post: - http://how2map.blogspot.com/2011/06/osgeo-stay-out-of-training-pros-and.html Jody ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Certification only; stay out of training :-)
> > Indeed the main benefit of certification here would be as an income draw to > > keep > > OSGeo going. > This is also interesting: currently we are using the surplus from courses to > partly > finance our (mainly QGIS) development. I do not think redirecting these > resources to > OSGeo would be a clever think to do. There is scope for competition between > OSGeo and > individual project, which is no good. I don't think anybody is interested in the foundation competing with existing training courses. (Indeed training is one of the few places where any cost recovery on the udig project occurs). That said if you don't want OSGeo competing in training - how would you like to pay for the foundation? I am not sure if your organisation sponsors OSGeo? I don't think my employer does (preferring to volunteer marketing effort); and I don't personally sponsor the foundation (preferring volunteer effort myself). So this is the nice part about certification: - it would make your training courses stronger (ie more attractive to customers) - it makes training an easier thing to sell (take training as one step towards getting ready for certification) - it would make QGIS more attractive (as a technology in which certification was available) - it provides the foundation with a revenue stream that does not compete with any of the member organisations (Indeed certification is a "service" that very few organisations could offer credibly?) >From the QGIS standpoint the benefit for you really is focused on those first >couple of points; certifications would be an additional activity the >foundation could perform that would make your training courses more valuable. My own thoughts on this (using your project as an example): 1. Testing criteria - organisations offering QGSI training are asked to supply criteria to use for the certification process (If your organisation wants to be involved this is where you would take part) - the foundation pays for someone to write the test material for a specific qgis release (perhaps you? perhaps another vendor?) - the test is passed around to those supplying QGIS certification criteria for review; production of an answer key etc... 2. Next time you do a training course - offer your customer the option of either: a) taking the certification tests at a later date (you can pass on the foundation contact details; and get a 30% cut in thanks for the referral) b) arranging for a "bulk purchase" where you can offer your customer a discount for doing it then and their (perhaps give the customer a 20% discount to make it more attractive). You would need to play with the numbers to make this attractive (so customers don't just ordering the test for their top people). 3. Each month the foundation hires one of the organisation that defined the testing criteria to mark the tests a) a month is chosen to have enough tests together in one spot to make effective use of time b) the organisation hired should be a set rotation to be "fair" c) the organisation hired should probably not be responsible for the training of any of the students being marked in order to keep this as independent as possible 4. Marking should be brutal a) the idea is to force a spread so that potential employers can actually respect the certification b) cover open source activities (bug submission, contribution to documentation, participation on the user list). If it is any kind of advanced certification this goes into building the application from source code, applying a patch and building locally (can submit a screen snap of the result), links to accepted submissions etc... c) How brutal? How about if they get everything right they end up with 80%; the last 10% is there to allow markers to recognise "outstanding" d) if you really want to soften the blow you can provide different levels of certification out of the same test (confusion may not be worth it; easier to fail people and ask them to try again) 5. Updates to certification should be cheaper and repeatable a) as each release comes out the certification criteria should be updated b) a cheaper rate for "repeat customers" should be available - to encourage this both as a revenue stream - and as a certification process that employers can trust to be update to date. Why hire someone certified in QGIS 1.6 when QGIS 3 has been released? c) the cheaper rate should also be available to those repeating the same test (partly to soften the blow due to the expected failure rate) The other scenario for using the certification tests is: 3) Next time you hire someone a) Buy a "bulk purchase" of tests b) Ask applicants to take the test; and submit review (this is nice for them because it is on your dime; and nice for you as you get an objective evaluation) c) The foundation arranges for someone to mark this pronto as part of the service; probably only returning details on the top five candidates d) The foundation could change more to access
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Certification only; stay out of training :-)
Il 12/06/2011 16:56, Jody Garnett ha scritto: > Indeed the main benefit of certification here would be as an income draw to > keep > OSGeo going. This is also interesting: currently we are using the surplus from courses to partly finance our (mainly QGIS) development. I do not think redirecting these resources to OSGeo would be a clever think to do. There is scope for competition between OSGeo and individual project, which is no good. All the best. -- Paolo Cavallini: http://www.faunalia.it/pc ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
