I don't think it's accurate to say that Cisco, Microsoft and Novell have contributed to the "paper cert syndrome". They simply created certifications in an effort to distinguish those who are familiar with their products from those who don't. The people who use brain-dumps and boot camps are the real culprits. They get the certifications that get them the jobs, then prove they don't know what they're doing, and in turn it casts a shadow of doubt on those who do (know what they're doing). You can't blame them. Besides, all three have made their more recent certifications more difficult with simulations, etc. And I don't think many people doubt that someone who has passed the CCIE lab knows at least enough to stumble through and succeed. Anyway, I think the idea is great, and I hope they succeed. I will definitely be in line to get my FCP certification. Maybe it will be the difference between me and that other guy. Maybe you (not anyone specific -- generally).
""Chuck's Long Road"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > ""Kevin Wigle"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > If you read further into the site you will that the FCPA is proposing to > > deliver hands-on testing at both junior and senior levels of > certification. > > > > They have buy in from the major vendors such as Cisco, Microsoft, Novell > and > > > CL: ironically, all three of the above have contributed mightily to the > whole "paper cert" syndrome! > > > > Red Hat. > > > > Both Novell and Red Hat and talking it up as the "capstone" to their > certs, > > but not as a replacement. > > > > People who have CCIE / CDE / RHCE certs will be awarded a FCPA cert > without > > being tested. > > > > Which is a bit funny as the list has from time to time "discussed" paper > > CCIEs. > > > > Since the FCPA cert is just another lab, I don't know how it would be > > different from any other. It still doesn't "automatically" mean yoou have > > real world experience, just real lab experience. > > > > However, it is almost a daily discussion where I work about how someone > has > > some initials but can't seem to troubleshoot out of a paper bag. Quite > > often people are sent off on courses but are not "motivated" to take the > > exam. Anybody can sit at the back of the classroom and play solitaire - > not > > everyone passes the exam. > > > > A "hands-on" exam I think would be very beneficial as another tool to > assess > > a person's ability. Still, as mentioned we will always be able to debate > > the "lab/real world" gambit but at least the whole discussion would be on > a > > higher plane. > > > > However, being on a "vendor neutral" plain, anyone can walk in and take > the > > exam without pre-requisites. This could be enhanced by having a real > > pre-requisite of having the vendor's "paper" cert before attempting the > lab. > > > > But this can be debated also. On the site in one of the meeting minutes > was > > an interesting quote: > > > http://www.fieldcertification.org/Composition/Steering_Committee_Meeting_Min > > utes_06-18-01.htm > > > > Eighty Pound Weight: Mr. Brown commented that he believed a company > could > > spend a million dollars designing a multiple-choice test which accurately > > predicts whether a person is likely able to lift an eighty-pound weight > or, > > the test taker could prove this ability merely by being asked to lift an > > eighty-pound weight. Mr. Brown believed the FCPA. effort is attempting to > > have technology workers prove themselves by "lifting eighty pound > weights." > > > > > > I think I like what FCPA wants to accomplish but the devil is always in > the > > details and whether yet another certification will gain industry > acceptance. > > > > In this regard, the FCPA seems to have attracted participation from a lot > of > > the industry's top vendors so maybe the time is right for performance > based > > testing............. > > > > Kevin Wigle > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Chuck's Long Road" > > To: > > Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 6:00 PM > > Subject: Re: Lookee Lookie - new certifications!!!! [7:54435] > > > > > > > check further into the site: > > > > > > http://www.fieldcertification.org/Field_Certification.htm > > > > > > read all about "field certification" > > > > > > also > > > > > > http://www.fieldcertification.org/How_It_Works.htm > > > > > > sure looks like a whole new level of certification to me. > > > > > > not that I disagree with the principal here. But the home page ( and > > Cisco's > > > site ) does talk about this > > > > > > "Get the Field Certified Professional (FCPT) credential to assert > yourself > > > as the real IT professional with actual skills and set your credential > > apart > > > from the paper ones! " > > > > > > Like I said - a whole new certification to certify that your > certification > > > is better than some "paper" certification. > > > > > > I can hardly wait. > > > > > > Chuck > > > > > > -- > > > > > > www.chuckslongroad.info > > > like my web site? > > > take the survey! > > > > > > > > > > > > ""Steven A. Ridder"" wrote in message > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > Not sure I saw any new certifications, just a new org. to certify > > > > ""Chuck's Long Road"" wrote in message > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > > Check this out" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/625/ccie/ccie_program/fcpa.html > > > > > > > > > > AND > > > > > > > > > > http://www.fieldcertification.org > > > > > > > > > > AND > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.fieldcertification.org/Membership/Pre_Qualification.htm > > > > > > > > > > Now you can get a certification that certifies that you are > > certified!!! > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > www.chuckslongroad.info > > > > > like my web site? > > > > > take the survey! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=54463&t=54435 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
