Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1q7Key-0002LL-Au for pgsql-advocacy@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2023 18:47:00 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1q7Kew-0005JU-Og for pgsql-advocacy@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2023 18:46:58 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1q7Kew-0005JL-CT for pgsql-advocacy@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2023 18:46:58 +0000 Received: from pgintl.fastcrypt.com ([149.56.129.164]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1q7Keq-000wLz-G6 for pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org; Thu, 08 Jun 2023 18:46:56 +0000 Received: from mail-lj1-f170.google.com (mail-lj1-f170.google.com [209.85.208.170]) by pgintl.fastcrypt.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C2C4C20318 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2023 14:46:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lj1-f170.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2b203360d93so9721901fa.3 for ; Thu, 08 Jun 2023 11:46:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDz2t6rsIvcJB+RT1lRNqjEOAHT0g8zzYTtwpBIM80RXXC4MqQvb viBlp6HPIDq8opG+XqfqFvcG8s9aJSAe5+BXAQM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ6WKh60r/ZipTJvFQYbCo2+37tsAiU91DLrYXF+dWt85FvdkPM+MZVXVW1tDVfWluOcgjl/rR823TgXppmfEI4= X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:20e:b0:2b1:fda8:e653 with SMTP id y14-20020a05651c020e00b002b1fda8e653mr2681484ljn.27.1686250007835; Thu, 08 Jun 2023 11:46:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230606.103516.395571408093366645.t-ishii@sranhm.sra.co.jp> <420735c2-f718-17fe-6f0c-96f969a20bcb@aklaver.com> <964325640.821476.1686230765866@connect.xfinity.com> In-Reply-To: From: Dave Cramer Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2023 14:46:30 -0400 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: RFC: a new try for an official community approved certification To: Charly Cc: James Keener , Robert Bernier , pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b83dfe05fda2ac48" List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk --000000000000b83dfe05fda2ac48 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 8 Jun 2023 at 11:09, Charly wrote: > I would like to start by stating that I don't believe in certifications. = I > mean, they are good guides for people who want to start studying and ente= r > the niche the certification is testing, but they don't measure knowledge. > They measure how much content one is able to memorize, which is by no > means, knowledge. > Given my comments below, I'm starting to have some serious doubts about the utility of this. On one hand in an ideal world people would actually learn what is required and the test would require some level of competency. On the other hand most of the answers are available with some google searches and it will be nearly impossible to stop people from using it to pass the test. If enough people do this the certification proves nothing. > > That said, I like the process @James described. For written tests, just > give the candidates 1k questions book and randomly pick XX number of > questions. If they get it right, they at least went to the book and have = a > good memory. If they fail, try again. > Pretty hard to not use the internet to grok the answers which essentially makes this an open book test. > > IMHO, if we really want to attempt to test knowledge, then we need to > think of having simulated "challenges" to be solved. And it doesn't matte= r > if the user has or not access to the internet, if they can ask or not for > help. If they are able to solve, and explain the reasons they solved the > problem, then they have shown they acquired the needed knowledge for that > level of certificate. > > Agreed this would prove knowledge, much harder to implement though. Adding my 2cents Dave > Those are my 2=C2=A2 > > On Thu, 8 Jun 2023 at 11:41, James Keener wrote: > >> I don't really have any business being in this discussion, but I figured >> I'd toss this in anyway. I realize it's not in-line with what many of y= ou >> are thinking, but it may be a good example to follow if we align >> expectations with what it provides. Also, apologies if this has come up; >> I've been trying to follow but there have been a lot of messages. >> >> In the US, to get an Amerature Radio license you have to study the >> requisite material, which includes the exam questions and answers. The e= xam >> is administered by anyone who has passed the VE (Volunteer Examiner) exa= m >> and is 2nd or 3rd level. There are currently 3 license levels: Technicia= n, >> General, and Extra. Each one has more in-depth question, but all of the >> questions and answers for all levels are public. The exam taken is a >> randomized subset of those questions. (I believe it's something like 10%= ? I >> could be wrong without looking it up.) >> >> As for mechanics of administering the exam, at least three VEs need to b= e >> present who are not related to you and who are of the level you're testi= ng >> for or higher. Due to Covid, remote exams are now allowed/more common, b= ut >> are done with webcam on during the exam so the VE can watch. >> >> While this is obviously easy to game, the expectation is that if you >> passed the exam, even if you only studied the questions and answers, you= 'd >> have the basic amount of knowledge needed to operate at the license leve= l >> you passed with. >> >> Jim >> >> On Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 9:26=E2=80=AFAM Robert Bernier >> wrote: >> >>> Guys, >>> >>> I still have bad memories when we tried this the last time some 15 year= s >>> ago. >>> >>> Let's do this in small steps: >>> - Create a mail list just for this thread >>> - Instead of creating an approved certification how's about developing >>> an RFC of sorts outlining expected competencies for various classificat= ions >>> of knowledge (that should be real fun) is expected to carry out certain >>> tasks. Then, after there's some sort of agreement in the community. >>> >>> Hope this helps. >>> >>> Robert Bernier >>> robert.bernier@percona.com >>> >>> >>> > > -- > Regards, > > *Charly Batista* > *Shanghai, China* > *carlbsb@gmail.com * > *https://www.linkedin.com/in/charlybatista/ > * > > *Linux user #391083* > > > *=E2=80=9CIf you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange these = apples > then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an idea an= d > I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two > ideas." George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)* > --000000000000b83dfe05fda2ac48 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



<= div class=3D"gmail_quote">
On Thu, 8 J= un 2023 at 11:09, Charly <carlbsb@g= mail.com> wrote:
I would like to start by stating that I don&#= 39;t believe in certifications. I mean, they are good guides for people who= want to start studying and enter the niche the certification is testing, b= ut they don't measure knowledge. They measure how much content one is a= ble to memorize, which is by no means, knowledge.
<= div>
Given my comments below, I'm starting to have some s= erious doubts about the utility of this. On one hand in an ideal world peop= le would actually learn what is required and the test would require some le= vel of competency. On the other hand most of the answers are available with= some google searches and it will be nearly impossible to stop people from = using it to pass the test. If enough people do this the certification prove= s nothing.

That said, I like the process @James described= . For written tests, just give the candidates 1k questions book and randoml= y pick XX number of questions. If they get it right, they at least went to = the book and have a good memory. If they fail, try again.
Pretty hard to not use the internet to grok the answers which e= ssentially makes this an open book test.=C2=A0

IMHO, if we= really want to attempt to test knowledge, then we need to think of having = simulated "challenges" to be solved. And it doesn't matter if= the user has or not access to the internet, if they can ask or not for hel= p. If they are able to solve, and explain the reasons they solved the probl= em, then they have shown they acquired the needed knowledge for that level = of certificate.

Agreed this wou= ld prove knowledge, much harder to implement though.

Adding my 2cents

Dave

= =C2=A0
Those are my 2=C2=A2

On Thu, 8 Jun 2023 at 11:41, = James Keener <jim= @jimkeener.com> wrote:
I don't really have any business be= ing in this discussion, but I figured I'd toss this in anyway.=C2=A0 I = realize it's not in-line with what many of you are thinking, but it may= be a good example to follow if we align expectations with what it provides= . Also, apologies if this has come up; I've been trying to follow but t= here have been a lot of messages.

In the US, t= o get an Amerature Radio license you have to study the requisite material, = which includes the exam questions and answers. The exam is administered by = anyone who has passed the VE (Volunteer Examiner) exam and is 2nd or 3rd le= vel. There are currently 3 license levels: Technician, General, and Extra. = Each one has more in-depth question, but all of the questions and answers f= or all levels are public. The exam taken is a randomized subset of those qu= estions. (I believe it's something like 10%? I could be wrong without l= ooking it up.)

As for mechanics of administering t= he exam, at least three VEs need to be present who are not related to you a= nd who are of the level you're testing for or higher. Due to Covid, rem= ote exams are now allowed/more common, but are done with webcam on during t= he exam so the VE can watch.

While this is obv= iously easy to game, the expectation is that if you passed the exam, even i= f you only studied the questions and answers, you'd have the basic amou= nt of knowledge needed to operate at the license level you passed with.

Jim

On Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 9:26=E2=80=AFAM R= obert Bernier <robert7390@comcast.net> wrote:
Guys,

I still have bad memories when we tried this the last time some 15 years ag= o.

Let's do this in small steps:
- Create a mail list just for this thread
- Instead of creating an approved certification how's about developing = an RFC of sorts outlining expected competencies for various classifications= of knowledge (that should be real fun) is expected to carry out certain ta= sks. Then, after there's some sort of agreement in the community.

Hope this helps.

Robert Bernier
robert.bern= ier@percona.com




--
Regards,

Charly Batista
= Shanghai, China
= Linux user #391083
=E2=80=9CIf you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange these ap= ples then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an idea= and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have = two ideas."
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)
--000000000000b83dfe05fda2ac48--