[KLUG Members] RE: Certification -- WAS: Nautilus in RH 7.3 and Samba shares...revisited...

[Bryan J. Smith]

[ Since this involves "professional development," I assume it's "on-topic" for
the MEMBERS list?  If not, let me know. ]

Quoting Tahnesha Pinckney <tep@hanify.com>:
> I was considering RHCE as well (maybe I wouldn't be having all these
> probs..), but could not negotiate a "business" reason in my request to
> have the firm fund it.  They would only cave in on the MCSE since most
> of our systems here are running WinNT 4.0 and a migration to 2000
> looms on the horizon...

The RHCE is $749 and is only given on a Friday at an approved RedHat facility. 
This is, again, because it is lab-based, a full day long, and 100% peer-reviewed
(not "computer graded") -- purposely designed after the Cisco CCIE (only 2.5
hours of "build" and 2.5 hours of "debug" -- instead of a day each like the CCIE).

There are three other organizations providing Linux certifications, and all are
"computer administered" (unlike the RedHat cert):
- CompTIA Linux+:  Single test
- Linux Professional Institute:  Multiple tests/levels
- SAIR GNU Linux:  Multiple tests/levels

> Their Network+ and Server+ courses are quite good...

Er, I beg to differ.  I got a 93% on both with 0 study, and you only need
~65-70% to pass.  They were "definition tests" IMHO.

I found the first half of Sun's Solaris Certified Network Administrator (SCNA)
exam that govered "general TCP/IP concepts" to be a far better test of
"knowledge" than the Network+ by an order of magnitude.

BTW, I also scored 93% on the i-Net+ and 95% on the Linux+.  I scored perfect on
both sections of the new, adaptive A+ -- they couldn't ask a hard enough
question for me.  They asked me to become a Subject Matter Expert (SME) for the
A+, but their terms didn't appeal to me.

> both of which I'm taking as well.  I wouldn't be the surprised if
> the Security+ is just the same.

I'm hoping so because, like the Network+ and Server+, I'm taking it "straight
up," no study.

> As for the MCSEs, I'm taking the first exam at the end of the
> month which, if you ask me, seems like a very simple exam to pass in
> comparision to all the Linux/Unix stuff I'm trying to learn.

The problem with "computer administered" exams is that they are either:
 1) Simple -- e.g., CompTIA
 2) Memorization -- e.g., Sun, or
 3) Ambiguous -- e.g, Microsoft

CompTIA makes the tests simple.  Sun and Microsoft make them harder to pass by
either extensive "memorization" or "ambiguous" questions.

The only "real exam" is one that is given in a lab environment, on real systems.
 That way, you're not screwed if you don't know something little, and nothing is
ambiguous -- _but_ you have to know what you are doing to pass.

That's why the RHCE is ones of the best tests of actual "knowledge."  The trade
off is the cost of administering them, which means the cost of the exam for the
trainee, and the availability of them is limited to fixed locations where there
is the actual equipment and an authorized, peer RHCE to grade you.

Cisco tries to thrown in "simulations" in its computer administered tests (most
things outside of the CCIE).  While these do enough, there are usually only a
few per exam.

Novell adds "screen shots" and "click throughs."  While these make it better
than Microsoft's "case study" and ambiguous questions, it's still far from
lab-based exams.

-- 
Bryan J. Smith, E.I. (BSECE)       Contact Info:  http://thebs.org
[ http://thebs.org/files/resume/BryanJonSmith_certifications.pdf ]
------------------------------------------------------------------
  The more government chooses for you, the less freedom you have.