Thread: RFC: a new try for an official community approved certification
Hi everyone, At PgCon I mentioned a was going to create this thread so here we go: == why do we need one? The fact that there is no official certification is a real problem because anyone can offer theirs and have bad answers or confuse people about how things work. You can think that people looking for a certification should ensure first but what if the company has a good reputation because other certifications they have are good? And this is an example of this happening, recently I got a certification from a less-known company, and I found at least one question in which there weren't any correct answers so I had to choose the answer that was at least partially correct. And of course this could happen to anyone. == we have tried… and failed Several years ago there was a project for creating a pensum that all companies that wanted to offer the "official" certification should comply with. But being postgres developed and improved so fast we ended up with half the pensum and we already had to adapt part of it because of the changes in the new version. But of course there was the problem of not really prepared trainers, a know a guy that was certified by a well known postgres company but he clearly understood wrong somethings because he was teaching that you can restore a pg_dump'ed database and then apply wals from the original server and have PITR (doh). == so the problems - mantaining/updating a pensum would be difficult - is not only a matter of covering the pensum, it should be done right - other problems are: -- current certifications are not neutral and cover also tools from the company doing the certification -- even if they have the same name, certifications cover normally different subjects in different companies == so, my idea - Let's focus on creating just one certification covering only core/contrib functionalities of postgres, and let companies have their own certifications for third party products. - don't try to force the pensum, just let's create a database of validated questions and validated answers. If we focus on only one certification (something like associate postgresql or something like that) we can let companies decide if they want to have 1, 2 or 3 modules to prepare people to give the exam. - Who creates the questions? And who validates them? The answer to both questions is "trainers" from companies that want to offer the exam. So, a trainer creates a question and another trainer (hopefully from another company) validates the question and the answers for the question. Questions and answers should also be validated for postgres version and operating system. If a company cannot successfully prepare people for the exam they could check if they are teaching right (I mean that they are not saying old/not exact things). So, having a certification made from a pool of validated questions/answers don't only will help companies choosing trainings but will in effect improve the quality of trainers. There are a lot of open questions yet, like where the exams will be taken. In the community infrastructure? in the company's? but I guess we have still enough for start commenting. -- Jaime Casanova Director de Servicios Profesionales SYSTEMGUARDS - Consultores de PostgreSQL
On 6/1/23 15:04, Jaime Casanova wrote: > Hi everyone, > > At PgCon I mentioned a was going to create this thread so here we go: > > > So, having a certification made from a pool of validated > questions/answers don't only will help companies choosing trainings > but will in effect improve the quality of trainers. > > There are a lot of open questions yet, like where the exams will be > taken. In the community infrastructure? in the company's? > > but I guess we have still enough for start commenting. 1) Who oversees all of the above? 2) How are the questions and answers developed without leaking the information out to test takers? 3) Does core mean just the community Postgres? > > -- > Jaime Casanova > Director de Servicios Profesionales > SYSTEMGUARDS - Consultores de PostgreSQL > > -- Adrian Klaver adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
Thank you for bringing this topic to discussion, Jaime!
To add to Adrian's questions here are my 5 cents
Postgres is a community that consists of people from different companies with variety of interests:
- Postgres/open source/community-focused interests
- personal interests
- their company's interests
To create a fully "unbiased" certification there is a need for a working group whose interests would be fully aligned.
I must admit, I'm a bit pessimistic about a unified Postgres certification as it would put people who would be working on it in a difficult situation when they're serving all the abovementioned interests.
Valeria
On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 11:31 PM Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com> wrote:
On 6/1/23 15:04, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> At PgCon I mentioned a was going to create this thread so here we go:
>
>
> So, having a certification made from a pool of validated
> questions/answers don't only will help companies choosing trainings
> but will in effect improve the quality of trainers.
>
> There are a lot of open questions yet, like where the exams will be
> taken. In the community infrastructure? in the company's?
>
> but I guess we have still enough for start commenting.
1) Who oversees all of the above?
2) How are the questions and answers developed without leaking the
information out to test takers?
3) Does core mean just the community Postgres?
>
> --
> Jaime Casanova
> Director de Servicios Profesionales
> SYSTEMGUARDS - Consultores de PostgreSQL
>
>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 at 05:57, Valeria Kaplan <kaplan.valeria@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you for bringing this topic to discussion, Jaime!To add to Adrian's questions here are my 5 centsPostgres is a community that consists of people from different companies with variety of interests:- Postgres/open source/community-focused interests- personal interests- their company's interestsTo create a fully "unbiased" certification there is a need for a working group whose interests would be fully aligned.
Agreed
I must admit, I'm a bit pessimistic about a unified Postgres certification as it would put people who would be working on it in a difficult situation when they're serving all the abovementioned interests.
My pessimism is more around how you keep the answers from becoming public knowledge. I don't think that should stop us from working on this however.
Dave
ValeriaOn Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 11:31 PM Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com> wrote:On 6/1/23 15:04, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> At PgCon I mentioned a was going to create this thread so here we go:
>
>
> So, having a certification made from a pool of validated
> questions/answers don't only will help companies choosing trainings
> but will in effect improve the quality of trainers.
>
> There are a lot of open questions yet, like where the exams will be
> taken. In the community infrastructure? in the company's?
>
> but I guess we have still enough for start commenting.
1) Who oversees all of the above?
2) How are the questions and answers developed without leaking the
information out to test takers?
3) Does core mean just the community Postgres?
>
> --
> Jaime Casanova
> Director de Servicios Profesionales
> SYSTEMGUARDS - Consultores de PostgreSQL
>
>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
Re: RFC: a new try for an official community approved certification
From
"Gunnar \"Nick\" Bluth"
Date:
Am 02.06.23 um 00:31 schrieb Adrian Klaver: > 2) How are the questions and answers developed without leaking the > information out to test takers? I guess it'd make sense to ask the LPI folks how they handle this. Maybe we could even slip under their umbrella, once the community agrees on a (closed) group working on the actual exam questions...? Just my 2p, -- Gunnar "Nick" Bluth Eimermacherweg 106 D-48159 Münster Mobil +49 172 8853339 Email: gunnar.bluth@pro-open.de __________________________________________________________________________ "Ceterum censeo SystemD esse delendam" - Cato
Attachment
Hello all,
Not sure about this idea, but possibly a better one than having a single company (ex. Red Hat and EDB come to mind) run the show for certifications/competency rating. I like it from this respect.
I will love the idea if you are able to, somehow, offer the training/testing in languages other than English. PostgreSQL is an international open source project and English-only training/testing is not very appropriate. This gives a huge advantage to the community's native English speakers (the goal here is to produce something 'unbiased' I thought).
Perhaps develop it in English, with input from those from non-English speaking countries on your working group, and then have it translated into multiple languages (also: be careful how you prioritize these, but if you have, say, a member from India on your working group, perhaps Hindi becomes one of the first).
Sincerely,
Katie
From: Dave Cramer <davecramer@postgres.rocks>
Sent: 02 June 2023 07:04
To: Valeria Kaplan <kaplan.valeria@gmail.com>
Cc: Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>; Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>; PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: a new try for an official community approved certification
Sent: 02 June 2023 07:04
To: Valeria Kaplan <kaplan.valeria@gmail.com>
Cc: Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>; Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>; PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: a new try for an official community approved certification
Attention : courriel externe | external email
On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 at 05:57, Valeria Kaplan <kaplan.valeria@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you for bringing this topic to discussion, Jaime!To add to Adrian's questions here are my 5 centsPostgres is a community that consists of people from different companies with variety of interests:- Postgres/open source/community-focused interests- personal interests- their company's interestsTo create a fully "unbiased" certification there is a need for a working group whose interests would be fully aligned.
Agreed
I must admit, I'm a bit pessimistic about a unified Postgres certification as it would put people who would be working on it in a difficult situation when they're serving all the abovementioned interests.
My pessimism is more around how you keep the answers from becoming public knowledge. I don't think that should stop us from working on this however.
Dave
ValeriaOn Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 11:31 PM Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com> wrote:On 6/1/23 15:04, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> At PgCon I mentioned a was going to create this thread so here we go:
>
>
> So, having a certification made from a pool of validated
> questions/answers don't only will help companies choosing trainings
> but will in effect improve the quality of trainers.
>
> There are a lot of open questions yet, like where the exams will be
> taken. In the community infrastructure? in the company's?
>
> but I guess we have still enough for start commenting.
1) Who oversees all of the above?
2) How are the questions and answers developed without leaking the
information out to test takers?
3) Does core mean just the community Postgres?
>
> --
> Jaime Casanova
> Director de Servicios Profesionales
> SYSTEMGUARDS - Consultores de PostgreSQL
>
>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
Hi,
Le ven. 2 juin 2023 à 15:13, Katherine Mcmillan <kmcmi046@uottawa.ca> a écrit :
Hello all,Not sure about this idea, but possibly a better one than having a single company (ex. Red Hat and EDB come to mind) run the show for certifications/competency rating. I like it from this respect.
There are other companies doing PostgreSQL certification. SRA in Japan, and Dalibo in France (disclaimer: I work for Dalibo) offer certification exams for their customers.
I will love the idea if you are able to, somehow, offer the training/testing in languages other than English. PostgreSQL is an international open source project and English-only training/testing is not very appropriate. This gives a huge advantage to the community's native English speakers (the goal here is to produce something 'unbiased' I thought).Perhaps develop it in English, with input from those from non-English speaking countries on your working group, and then have it translated into multiple languages (also: be careful how you prioritize these, but if you have, say, a member from India on your working group, perhaps Hindi becomes one of the first).
Multiple languages would be a must, I totally agree. Dalibo did its own certification because the community didn't seem to be able to work on a unified one, despite many tries. I'd love to see a unified Postgres certification, and we (Dalibo) would gladly work on this project, but I also am kinda skeptical of the outcome.
Regards.
--
Guillaume.
Hi Guillaume,
That's interesting - the PostgreSQL training/testing that Dalibo is offering is in French?
I wonder if we could work out an agreement with Dalibo and build on the training that you have already developed, rather than re-inventing the wheel, so to speak. That way we're kind of building the unified or standardized English and French training/testing at the same time ('unified' or 'standardized' sounds better to me than 'community developed').
Just some thoughts :)
Sincerely,
Katie
From: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info>
Sent: 02 June 2023 10:06
To: Katherine Mcmillan <kmcmi046@uottawa.ca>
Cc: Valeria Kaplan <kaplan.valeria@gmail.com>; Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>; Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>; PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: a new try for an official community approved certification
Sent: 02 June 2023 10:06
To: Katherine Mcmillan <kmcmi046@uottawa.ca>
Cc: Valeria Kaplan <kaplan.valeria@gmail.com>; Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>; Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>; PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: a new try for an official community approved certification
Attention : courriel externe | external email
Hi,
Le ven. 2 juin 2023 à 15:13, Katherine Mcmillan <kmcmi046@uottawa.ca> a écrit :
Hello all,Not sure about this idea, but possibly a better one than having a single company (ex. Red Hat and EDB come to mind) run the show for certifications/competency rating. I like it from this respect.
There are other companies doing PostgreSQL certification. SRA in Japan, and Dalibo in France (disclaimer: I work for Dalibo) offer certification exams for their customers.
I will love the idea if you are able to, somehow, offer the training/testing in languages other than English. PostgreSQL is an international open source project and English-only training/testing is not very appropriate. This gives a huge advantage to the community's native English speakers (the goal here is to produce something 'unbiased' I thought).Perhaps develop it in English, with input from those from non-English speaking countries on your working group, and then have it translated into multiple languages (also: be careful how you prioritize these, but if you have, say, a member from India on your working group, perhaps Hindi becomes one of the first).
Multiple languages would be a must, I totally agree. Dalibo did its own certification because the community didn't seem to be able to work on a unified one, despite many tries. I'd love to see a unified Postgres certification, and we (Dalibo) would gladly work on this project, but I also am kinda skeptical of the outcome.
Regards.
--
Guillaume.
Le ven. 2 juin 2023 à 16:35, Katherine Mcmillan <kmcmi046@uottawa.ca> a écrit :
Hi Guillaume,That's interesting - the PostgreSQL training/testing that Dalibo is offering is in French?
Yes, that's only available in french.
I wonder if we could work out an agreement with Dalibo and build on the training that you have already developed, rather than re-inventing the wheel, so to speak. That way we're kind of building the unified or standardized English and French training/testing at the same time ('unified' or 'standardized' sounds better to me than 'community developed').
I don't know, but it could be interesting. I'm not sure we did the work to update it to v15, but it sure covers v14. Anyway, I'm not the one who could decide such things :)
Just some thoughts :)Sincerely,KatieFrom: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info>
Sent: 02 June 2023 10:06
To: Katherine Mcmillan <kmcmi046@uottawa.ca>
Cc: Valeria Kaplan <kaplan.valeria@gmail.com>; Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>; Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>; PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: a new try for an official community approved certificationAttention : courriel externe | external emailHi,Le ven. 2 juin 2023 à 15:13, Katherine Mcmillan <kmcmi046@uottawa.ca> a écrit :Hello all,Not sure about this idea, but possibly a better one than having a single company (ex. Red Hat and EDB come to mind) run the show for certifications/competency rating. I like it from this respect.There are other companies doing PostgreSQL certification. SRA in Japan, and Dalibo in France (disclaimer: I work for Dalibo) offer certification exams for their customers.I will love the idea if you are able to, somehow, offer the training/testing in languages other than English. PostgreSQL is an international open source project and English-only training/testing is not very appropriate. This gives a huge advantage to the community's native English speakers (the goal here is to produce something 'unbiased' I thought).Perhaps develop it in English, with input from those from non-English speaking countries on your working group, and then have it translated into multiple languages (also: be careful how you prioritize these, but if you have, say, a member from India on your working group, perhaps Hindi becomes one of the first).Multiple languages would be a must, I totally agree. Dalibo did its own certification because the community didn't seem to be able to work on a unified one, despite many tries. I'd love to see a unified Postgres certification, and we (Dalibo) would gladly work on this project, but I also am kinda skeptical of the outcome.Regards.
--Guillaume.
--
Guillaume.
On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 at 10:45, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
Le ven. 2 juin 2023 à 16:35, Katherine Mcmillan <kmcmi046@uottawa.ca> a écrit :Hi Guillaume,That's interesting - the PostgreSQL training/testing that Dalibo is offering is in French?Yes, that's only available in french.I wonder if we could work out an agreement with Dalibo and build on the training that you have already developed, rather than re-inventing the wheel, so to speak. That way we're kind of building the unified or standardized English and French training/testing at the same time ('unified' or 'standardized' sounds better to me than 'community developed').
I don't think we are discussing training. This could be an option for companies to offer training for compensation.
I thought we were only discussing certification. In my mind that is just the testing.
Dave
I don't know, but it could be interesting. I'm not sure we did the work to update it to v15, but it sure covers v14. Anyway, I'm not the one who could decide such things :)Just some thoughts :)Sincerely,KatieFrom: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info>
Sent: 02 June 2023 10:06
To: Katherine Mcmillan <kmcmi046@uottawa.ca>
Cc: Valeria Kaplan <kaplan.valeria@gmail.com>; Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>; Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>; PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: a new try for an official community approved certificationAttention : courriel externe | external emailHi,Le ven. 2 juin 2023 à 15:13, Katherine Mcmillan <kmcmi046@uottawa.ca> a écrit :Hello all,Not sure about this idea, but possibly a better one than having a single company (ex. Red Hat and EDB come to mind) run the show for certifications/competency rating. I like it from this respect.There are other companies doing PostgreSQL certification. SRA in Japan, and Dalibo in France (disclaimer: I work for Dalibo) offer certification exams for their customers.I will love the idea if you are able to, somehow, offer the training/testing in languages other than English. PostgreSQL is an international open source project and English-only training/testing is not very appropriate. This gives a huge advantage to the community's native English speakers (the goal here is to produce something 'unbiased' I thought).Perhaps develop it in English, with input from those from non-English speaking countries on your working group, and then have it translated into multiple languages (also: be careful how you prioritize these, but if you have, say, a member from India on your working group, perhaps Hindi becomes one of the first).Multiple languages would be a must, I totally agree. Dalibo did its own certification because the community didn't seem to be able to work on a unified one, despite many tries. I'd love to see a unified Postgres certification, and we (Dalibo) would gladly work on this project, but I also am kinda skeptical of the outcome.Regards.
--Guillaume.
--Guillaume.
Le ven. 2 juin 2023 à 16:54, Dave Cramer <davecramer@postgres.rocks> a écrit :
On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 at 10:45, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:Le ven. 2 juin 2023 à 16:35, Katherine Mcmillan <kmcmi046@uottawa.ca> a écrit :Hi Guillaume,That's interesting - the PostgreSQL training/testing that Dalibo is offering is in French?Yes, that's only available in french.I wonder if we could work out an agreement with Dalibo and build on the training that you have already developed, rather than re-inventing the wheel, so to speak. That way we're kind of building the unified or standardized English and French training/testing at the same time ('unified' or 'standardized' sounds better to me than 'community developed').I don't think we are discussing training. This could be an option for companies to offer training for compensation.I thought we were only discussing certification. In my mind that is just the testing.
You're definitely right. My first message was to say some companies do testing. I know mine does in french. And I think we're still interested in participating in a community work on the testing.
DaveI don't know, but it could be interesting. I'm not sure we did the work to update it to v15, but it sure covers v14. Anyway, I'm not the one who could decide such things :)Just some thoughts :)Sincerely,KatieFrom: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info>
Sent: 02 June 2023 10:06
To: Katherine Mcmillan <kmcmi046@uottawa.ca>
Cc: Valeria Kaplan <kaplan.valeria@gmail.com>; Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>; Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>; PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: a new try for an official community approved certificationAttention : courriel externe | external emailHi,Le ven. 2 juin 2023 à 15:13, Katherine Mcmillan <kmcmi046@uottawa.ca> a écrit :Hello all,Not sure about this idea, but possibly a better one than having a single company (ex. Red Hat and EDB come to mind) run the show for certifications/competency rating. I like it from this respect.There are other companies doing PostgreSQL certification. SRA in Japan, and Dalibo in France (disclaimer: I work for Dalibo) offer certification exams for their customers.I will love the idea if you are able to, somehow, offer the training/testing in languages other than English. PostgreSQL is an international open source project and English-only training/testing is not very appropriate. This gives a huge advantage to the community's native English speakers (the goal here is to produce something 'unbiased' I thought).Perhaps develop it in English, with input from those from non-English speaking countries on your working group, and then have it translated into multiple languages (also: be careful how you prioritize these, but if you have, say, a member from India on your working group, perhaps Hindi becomes one of the first).Multiple languages would be a must, I totally agree. Dalibo did its own certification because the community didn't seem to be able to work on a unified one, despite many tries. I'd love to see a unified Postgres certification, and we (Dalibo) would gladly work on this project, but I also am kinda skeptical of the outcome.Regards.
--Guillaume.
--Guillaume.
--
Guillaume.
> but I guess we have still enough for start commenting. Note that LPI-Japan (a non profit organization) already has a Postgres-certification exam that can be taken world-wide through Pearson-VUE: https://oss-db.jp/eng_exam AFAIK right now this is Japanese-only. But there have been attempts to offer this in English too - see this old thread: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/8ae8dc03d25c7d3364a5eea2eec81c1f%40smtp.hushmail.com#ce98b3345adb10949ceb454d567f9039 I guess LPI-Japan could have interesting input to this discussion. Bye, Chris.
On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 5:04 PM Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec> wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > At PgCon I mentioned a was going to create this thread so here we go: > [...] > > There are a lot of open questions yet, like where the exams will be > taken. In the community infrastructure? in the company's? > > but I guess we have still enough for start commenting. > Hi everyone, Thanks for your comments. Mine was a long trip to return to Ecuador and then I had a lot of pending things to do. First, let me mention the good ideas I read on this thread: - Gunnar and Chris suggested that we could ask a NPO that is already successfully doing a cert, namely LPI. Do any of you have a contact there to ask this? - Katherine mentioned something that is what I had in mind and maybe didn't express it correctly. The idea is that companies doing training work together for this to happen. When I said "community developed" I certainly wasn't thinking of any person to be involved. We should have a closed group, the development of the cert should be done through a system and we need a process to give credentials to anyone that will be involved. For putting companies on the professional services we follow a process outlined here https://www.postgresql.org/about/policies/services-and-hosting/ we could have something similar for this. Now, some of the questions: > 1) Who oversees all of the above? while I spoke of teachers developing the questions and validating them (and that could be a medium-size group), we could have a small group of well-known community members (not necessarily teachers) that could act as a committee for administrative actions. > 2) How are the questions and answers developed without leaking the information out to test takers? My idea is to have a system, very similar to the one for adding professional services or news or whatever. Of course, that system publishes after validation, something we don't want to happen with this. Not everyone has access to that system. > 3) Does core mean just the community Postgres? Yes. I really think that it is not correct to say that you cannot certify because you know how to use repmgr instead of patroni or pg_auto_failover, and we cannot force everyone to know all the tools. Every company developing a tool could decide to create their own certs about their tools. -- Jaime Casanova Director de Servicios Profesionales SYSTEMGUARDS - Consultores de PostgreSQL
> Hi everyone, > > Thanks for your comments. Mine was a long trip to return to Ecuador > and then I had a lot of pending things to do. > > First, let me mention the good ideas I read on this thread: > > - Gunnar and Chris suggested that we could ask a NPO that is already > successfully doing a cert, namely LPI. Do any of you have a contact > there to ask this? I have a contact to LPI-Japan. Can you clarify what questions/requests you want to ask them? Best reagards, -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS LLC English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/ Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 8:35 PM Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp> wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > Thanks for your comments. Mine was a long trip to return to Ecuador > > and then I had a lot of pending things to do. > > > > First, let me mention the good ideas I read on this thread: > > > > - Gunnar and Chris suggested that we could ask a NPO that is already > > successfully doing a cert, namely LPI. Do any of you have a contact > > there to ask this? > > I have a contact to LPI-Japan. Can you clarify what questions/requests > you want to ask them? > I think what scares people the most is about the security, meaning that if the cert is somewhat community-made how they keep the questions not public, I guess part of the solution was already explained in which companies using a software are the ones making the standard (with users having to log in). Probably other questions have to do with the method to take the exams, actually once the exam is online (no controlled environment, which is the way most companies do it I guess) no matter what we do people can reveal the questions just by taking pictures or video of the screen. ANother question was about who oversees the process, probably about the organization of all this. Basically what we need is some guidance about all of it ;) -- Jaime Casanova Director de Servicios Profesionales SYSTEMGUARDS - Consultores de PostgreSQL
On 6/7/23 13:48, Jaime Casanova wrote: > On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 8:35 PM Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp> wrote: >> > ANother question was about who oversees the process, probably about > the organization of all this. That is the main question. Without an organization in place the rest of it is wasted effort. > > Basically what we need is some guidance about all of it ;) > Who is we? -- Adrian Klaver adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 6:09 PM Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com> wrote: > > On 6/7/23 13:48, Jaime Casanova wrote: [...] > > > > Basically what we need is some guidance about all of it ;) > > > > Who is we? > we: the community we: the ones that suggested to ask LPI how they organized everything we: me and my other personality you choose ;) -- Jaime Casanova Director de Servicios Profesionales SYSTEMGUARDS - Consultores de PostgreSQL
Guys, I still have bad memories when we tried this the last time some 15 years 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 forvarious classifications of knowledge (that should be real fun) is expected to carry out certain tasks. Then, after there'ssome sort of agreement in the community. Hope this helps. Robert Bernier robert.bernier@percona.com
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 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 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 exam is administered by anyone who has passed the VE (Volunteer Examiner) exam and is 2nd or 3rd level. There are currently 3 license levels: Technician, 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 be present who are not related to you and who are of the level you're testing for or higher. Due to Covid, remote exams are now allowed/more common, but 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 level you passed with.
Jim
On Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 9:26 AM Robert Bernier <robert7390@comcast.net> wrote:
Guys,
I still have bad memories when we tried this the last time some 15 years 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 classifications 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
On 6/8/23 06:26, Robert Bernier wrote: > Guys, > > I still have bad memories when we tried this the last time some 15 years 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 competenciesfor various classifications 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. +1 > > Hope this helps. > > Robert Bernier > robert.bernier@percona.com > > -- Adrian Klaver adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
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 enter 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.
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.
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 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.
Those are my 2¢
On Thu, 8 Jun 2023 at 11:41, James Keener <jim@jimkeener.com> 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 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 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 exam is administered by anyone who has passed the VE (Volunteer Examiner) exam and is 2nd or 3rd level. There are currently 3 license levels: Technician, 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 be present who are not related to you and who are of the level you're testing for or higher. Due to Covid, remote exams are now allowed/more common, but 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 level you passed with.JimOn Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 9:26 AM Robert Bernier <robert7390@comcast.net> wrote:Guys,
I still have bad memories when we tried this the last time some 15 years 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 classifications 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
Linux user #391083
“If 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 and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)
On Thu, 8 Jun 2023 at 11:09, Charly <carlbsb@gmail.com> 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 enter 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 matter 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¢On Thu, 8 Jun 2023 at 11:41, James Keener <jim@jimkeener.com> 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 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 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 exam is administered by anyone who has passed the VE (Volunteer Examiner) exam and is 2nd or 3rd level. There are currently 3 license levels: Technician, 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 be present who are not related to you and who are of the level you're testing for or higher. Due to Covid, remote exams are now allowed/more common, but 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 level you passed with.JimOn Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 9:26 AM Robert Bernier <robert7390@comcast.net> wrote:Guys,
I still have bad memories when we tried this the last time some 15 years 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 classifications 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 BatistaShanghai, ChinaLinux user #391083
“If 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 and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)
>> but I guess we have still enough for start commenting. > > > Note that LPI-Japan (a non profit organization) already has a Postgres-certification > exam that can be taken world-wide through Pearson-VUE: > > https://oss-db.jp/eng_exam > > AFAIK right now this is Japanese-only. But there have been attempts to offer this in > English too - see this old thread: I heard from LPI-Japan that they have already offered English PostgreSQL certifications: https://oss-db.jp/eng_exam https://lpi.or.jp/en/ -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS LLC English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/ Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
>> >> Note that LPI-Japan (a non profit organization) already has a Postgres-certification >> exam that can be taken world-wide through Pearson-VUE: >> >> https://oss-db.jp/eng_exam >> >> AFAIK right now this is Japanese-only. But there have been attempts to offer this in >> English too - see this old thread: > > I heard from LPI-Japan that they have already offered English > PostgreSQL certifications: > > https://oss-db.jp/eng_exam > https://lpi.or.jp/en/ > -- > Tatsuo Ishii > SRA OSS LLC > English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/ > Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp > Hi all, we have confirmation that LPI-Japan is offering their OSS-DB in english once again! I'm forwarding, with permission, the below message that was sent off-list. Bye, Chris. > From: 浅利康二 <koji.asari@lpi.or.jp> > Subject: Re: RFC: a new try for an official community approved certification > Date: 14 June 2023 at 08:17:05 CEST > > Hello all, > > Thank you for the introduction, Ishii-san! > We started to conduct the OSS-DB certification in 2011, which is a PostgreSQL certification that was taken over from SRAOSS. > And, many candidates take the exam and the number is still increasing every year. > Major exam takers are Japanese currently, but we also have the English version of the OSS-DB exam and you can take theexam at a number of Pearson Vue locations around the world. > Feel free to ask us, if you have some questions. > > Regards, > > --- > Koji Asari > LPI-Japan > https://lpi.or.jp/en/
On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 6:05 PM Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec> wrote: > And this is an example of this happening, recently I got a > certification from a less-known company, and I found at least one > question in which there weren't any correct answers so I had to choose > the answer that was at least partially correct. And of course this > could happen to anyone. I don't think a community approved certification is a good idea. The problem that you're complaining about here is that the certification was bad, and the way to solve that problem is to have something better. I'm in favor of certifications being better. If they are going to exist, they should be good, just like anything else. But having something be community-approved doesn't make it automatically better, because community members can make mistakes and do shoddy work just like anybody else. Making something a community effort does the following things: - It makes it the official version of a thing, which means more people will use that thing even if it's worse than some other version of the thing. - It means there's a group of people who are in charge of that thing, and it's usually very hard to replace that group of people if they stop doing the thing well. - It means that decisions need to be made by consensus, which is good for things where the cost of mistakes is high (like core development) and things where by their nature only one can exist (like the postgresql.org web site). A great example of competition-is-good-for-the-project is psycopg2. If there were just one Python connector for PostgreSQL, it wouldn't be called psycopg2. Because we never picked an official one, it helped a bunch of projects thrive, and the one most people use now is the one that won the competition. If there had only ever been one, it probably wouldn't be as good. A good example of the difficulty of managing a large overhaul through the community process is the documentation. There's a lot of great content in our documentation, but there's also a lot of old stuff that doesn't really get updated much and maybe isn't even really that relevant. Much of the valuable content is buried multiple layers down in the documentation in places where it's not necessarily that easy to find, while things of more peripheral importance are quite prominent. But getting agreement on how to address these problems, or even what the problems are, is pretty hard. However, since the official documentation is a thing of which there can by nature only be one, we're kind of locked in to accepting only those improvements that can make their way through that process. But we're not locked into such a ponderous process for certifications. The way we're going to get a great certification if someone goes and writes a bunch of great questions and then updates them regularly and vigorously based on feedback and changes in each new release -- and that requires either a fanatically dedicated volunteer, or for that person to be getting paid to do that work. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On 2023-06-14 22:42, Robert Haas wrote: > The way we're going to get a great certification if someone goes and > writes a bunch of great questions and then updates them regularly and > vigorously based on feedback and changes in each new release -- and > that requires either a fanatically dedicated volunteer, or for that > person to be getting paid to do that work. The PG project isn't exactly short of cash though, so that *might* be worth exploring. + Justin