>From the paper[1]: "A useful, more comprehensive definition can be derived from suggestions by several speakers at the workshop convened by this committee.
That definition identifies the following characteristics of a professional: (1) passing a knowledge and/or performance test, (2) superior completion of study of intellectual basis of the profession, (3) a sustained period of mentored experience/apprenticeship, (4) continuing education, (5) licensing by a formal authority, and (6) ethical standards of behavior with enforcement, including removal from the profession. A field that possesses all of these characteristics will almost certainly be recognized as a profession, but not all are required for a field to be recognized as a profession." Sysadmin meet the criteria of items 3 and 4, but those seem to be the least important of the 6 items, as many trades share the exact same criteria. [1]: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18446&page=14 On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Carolyn Rowland <[email protected]> wrote: > Mark, > > What is your definition of profession? > > Carolyn > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 10:23 AM, M^2 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It took me a long time to figure out that the referenced study/paper is >> not using the word profession in the way I would. They explicitly refer to >> a profession as meaning it has fixed certifying bodies like the AMA that >> serve as a guarantor of a certain body of knowledge, or some other explicit >> training/qualification, like a certified engineer. >> >> Given my widely aired views on the value of certification in general, my >> initial revulsion to the statement is softened. I believe that the paper >> in question is playing redefinition games, but keeping their redefinition >> in mind, it reduces my concern. >> >> It's a long essay that goes into many different areas. I won't comment >> on most of it for now at least, but it was an interesting read, even those >> parts I disagreed with. >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Joseph Kern <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> *"As you know, I work the cybersecurity trade, and I am gratified that >>> ten days ago the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, on behalf of the >>> Department of Homeland Security, concluded that cybersecurity should be >>> seen as an occupation and not a profession because the rate of change is >>> too great to consider professionalization."* >>> >>> Dan Geer just gave an amazing keynote (that I am currently writing up a >>> review for on my blog) and this quote stuck out at me as an interesting >>> topic of discussion for LOPSA. >>> >>> Here is the text of the keynote: >>> http://geer.tinho.net/geer.uncc.9x13.txt >>> Here is the study cited: >>> http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18446&page=R1 >>> >>> I don't think I've ever heard "rate of change" as being included in a >>> definition of a Professional before. Does this argument carry any weight? I >>> imagine Doctors and Lawyers experience a "rate of change" that is far lower >>> than that of a Systems Administrator or a Security "Professional". >>> >>> -- >>> Joseph A Kern >>> [email protected] >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators >>> http://lopsa.org/ >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators >> http://lopsa.org/ >> >> > -- Joseph A Kern [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
