Jack Nalbandian wrote: > > This constant blare of prejudicial bias in favor of "college > ed" and to the > definite disfavor of "certification" seems to come most > intensely from your > address. The undertext is always the same: "Go to college."
Woah, now there's something that completely came out of left field. When in any of my posts on this particular thread did I ever tell anybody to favor college over certification? I agre that in the past I have often advocated the benefits of college over certification, but not in this particular topic. And believe me, I think everybody on this board knows that I don't hold back, so if I wanted to talk about college, believe me, I would have talked about it, and done so explicitly. I've been described by many adjectives, some positive and some negative, but I don't think I've ever been described as 'subtle'. I don't believe in undertexts, I don't believe in subterfuge, and I don't believe in stealth. If something is on my mind, believe me, I'm going to say it. > > Is there a career-oriented quasi-political interest element at > play here > somewhere? Do you have a vested interest in recruiting people > into college > programs? Since you opened the door, I could very easily turn around and ask you whether you have a vested interest in cert programs? > > I am just asking speculative and rhetorical questions with the > hope of > shedding some light on this mysterious phenomenon of one-sided > expression of > "concern for the (alleged) degradation of" in this case > certification > programs. > > The CCIE itself, once dubbed the "doctorate of networking" is > now under > attack, and there have been numerous posts, only by NRF, > dedicated to this > topic. It is as though there is a one man crusade in progress > here. Only by me? Really? So nobody else has ever expressed any concerns about certs? Is that right? If I look back, I see that this whole thread was started by somebody else. I also see some rather back-handed statements about certs by people like Chuck (the road goes ever on). Howard Berkowitz is clearly no fan of certs either. > > 1. If CCIE or any other sort of education is suffering from > "degradation and > devaluation" due to the "oversaturation of test-related > information" on the > Internet, then the same argument can be made to the detriment > of the > University. Why else would you have entire "net > anti-plagiarist policing" > firms offering their services to universities to guard against > "copy and > paste" term papers? Oh you're right. But colleges have one very powerful thing going for them - the use of relative scoring, which serves as the ultimate leveling tool. Basically, there is no 'set' score that you need to get admitted to a college - you win admission by basically beating out the other candidates. So if all candidates happen to all improve due to PrincetonReview SAT prep courses or whatever, it doesn't really threaten the integrity of the program because colleges are still going to take the top candidates, whatever the term "top" happens to mean at that time. The use of relative scoring provides inherent stability to the integrity of the program. I believe that the CCIE should use something similar. But I digress... > > 2. Any such argument that attempts to "emphasize the value of > college > education" at the expense of the certification tracks offered > by MS, Cisco, > or anyone else is doomed to be subjected to equally potent > counter-arguments. The sad fact is that the Internet itself, > ironically, > has opened the door to billions of pages of information (thus, > the "info > highway"), a good portion of which will have its various > corrupting effects. > Any insistence on the superiority of one program over the other > due to some > "integrity" benchmark will only yield endless cycles of > worhtless arguments. And again, relative scoring could fix all of that. Think about this. The 'E' in CCIE stands for expert. But what does it really mean to be an expert? Think about how you use the term 'expert' in your daily life. It means to be above average in that particular field, as defined by whatever 'average' is at that particular time. Therefore the term 'expert' is inherently relative to the standards of the time. Therefore, if all of a sudden, people got substantially more educated about IP networking, then that doesn't mean that everybody suddenly becomes an expert. To be an expert in this world would mean that you would REALLY have to know a lot about IP networking. Therefore it doesn't really matter if everybody has more access to information. At the end of the day, some people will always know more than others, and it is those people who are properly defined as experts under the relative definition of the term. > > I for one am still going through the pains of recertification, > and I will do > so joyfully (nope, without cheat sheets or "practice tests"). > But, the good > news is that I am also enrolling for CS degree (actually IT > managment) next > fall!---:) > > p.s. The CCIEs that I have had the privilege of working with in > the field > have proven themselves to be experts time and time again. > They are still > very valuable in the marketplace. Myths are the only thing > that can taint > that. As far as I have seen, judging by the failure rate among > quite > competent colleagues of mine, the lab is still the lab. You are implying that I am peddling in myths. But again, I am not making things up. The fact is, some people (not all, but some) who are in charge of hiring really are starting to prefer the lower-number CCIE's. Go to the jobs forum or to acc or any of a number of other places. And once again, I must ask you to ask yourself the very question I posed in the beginning - would you want a lower number for yourself or not? Be honest with yourself. It's interesting how nobody wants to answer the question. Everybody wants to bring up all these other issues, but nobody wants to answer the question that is the very heart of my arguments in this thread. Guys, answer the question. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=70347&t=70328 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
