Is it time to change our thinking - IT Certification

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

If some of the more experienced members here can pass comment, it would help me out too as I often struggle to work out in what context and how to mention that a lot of stuff I have learned has been via technet and my lab.

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

No, it doesn't go against my advice at all. I'll say it again and again and again: certification is not learning... certification is not learning... certification is not learning!

Yes, you should have learned things like that years ago. But you shouldn't have certified on things like that years ago.

No... if you had known me back then and listened to me, you'd have gotten out of the "biggest shipping company in the world" and into a job that gives you an opportunity to work with the technologies that you don't yet have experience with.

And that's why I give the advice that I do... to keep people from taking the wrong steps in their career.

Uh... what? I never said he is overqualified for 2 years experience.

No, I have never said that, either. A degree is great. I recommend getting them. All I have said is that a degree doesn't automagically qualify you to administer servers, and it is no substitute for real-world experience.

You think you know what I say... but you really don't have the first clue about what I've said. You *seriously* have an assumption problem.

I'll bring it up as many times as it takes to show others that they should carefully consider how your career has gone before deciding whose advice to follow.

If you want to be successful, do what successful people do and follow their advice.

 

Yes, it is absolutely better than nothing. Learning is always a good idea.

Depends on the employer. Clueless ones will think that they should hire an MCSE. Intelligent ones will know better and will hire the more knowledgeable, experienced tech. It is these intelligent employers that I would recommend you seek.

Will your lab work be appreciated? The lab work itself, no. The knowledge you've gained while doing things in your lab, absolutely! The knowledge will shine forth in an interview.

 

One of the questions I have been asked in future is reference a piece of knowledge to an employer, IE "Give me an example of when you have XYZ up? was that at your last employer? take us through it"

Now if you have learned it through lab work, what is the best way of wording it?

 

Certification is one form of learning, Certification is one form of learning, Certification is one form of learning. Lets just say we disagree on that topic.

Please don't try to tell me what I should or shouldn't of certified on mate again pushing your views on me isn't going to work. I have a vast array of knowledge and experience and am good at my job only I know what is good for my career not you.

As for the other post you refer to then I'm happy for people to see how you go about giving advise and then start personal attacks on my career because I didn't agree with you. My career is fine mate but thanks for your touching degree of concern I was at a crossroads in my career and needed direction on the next step. The reason for the career going down the tubes was more a case of the way I see 2nd/3rd line support going in the next 5 years and not my career as such and the need to move away from 2nd/3rd line. Your way isn't the only way of doing things so give advice to people but stop ramming it down their throats. Let people make their own mind up as it is for you to do it for them. Before this turns into that other thread that's the last i have to say on the subject. This forum isn't the BosonMichael forum (which it feels like at times) and you do well to remember that others have an opinion different from yours.

I'm not going to follow this thread or post on it now to not hijack it further.

 

Spot on
how exactly is one supposed to have 'commercial' Exchange 2010 experience three months after it came out unless the former employer did a roll out? this is why techs HAVE home labs, this is why we tinker, and its why we are able to address the cutting edge technology professionally and with the foresight it deserves.

Experience is Experience, Commercial or otherwise, again i think that is perhaps a point we beat around the bush on and negate.. I can successfully simulate a 1000 user network at home with my lab systems, including traffic simulation (I get to avoid the service desk calls though to be fair!), hell when I did my CCNP stuff we would simulate ISDN calls for low bandwidth scenarios (man those boxes were pricey though!)

Experience is experience

 

Disagreed

if i tell them i can do it, and they sit me in front of a box and tell me to do it, and i do it again, i am unsure how it was not worth mentioning that I can in fact, do it

 

You do learn while certifying... but that's not the purpose of certification.

You can sit here and disagree with me and argue with me all you want... but one of us works in the IT certification industry after working as a senior network admin. Again, just pointing out my qualifications for giving the advice I do.

I'm speaking for the benefit of those who want to listen. I couldn't care less if you listen to my views or not. It is clear that you think you already know best. But your career shows otherwise.

No, I didn't attack your career because you didn't agree with me. I pointed out what you yourself had already said about your career because I don't want people to make the same mistakes you've made and are about to make.

...and that's why you're unemployed, right?

I think you need a serious dose of reality.

If you don't like it, there's a little ! you can click at the top of the thread. Or you can click Alt-F4. Or you can ignore me.

You can post all you want and disagree with me. I don't mind - really I don't! But that doesn't mean that I can't post and disagree with you. If you want to create your own and ban me from speaking, that is your prerogative. But until then, quit trying to shut me up. Just because you disagree with me doesn't mean I shouldn't post.

And... before you start with your assumption problem again and put words in my mouth... I haven't said that you shouldn't post. But it's quite evident that you don't want me to.

Excellent.

 

You can simulate traffic... but how are you going to simulate all the stupid things that users do? There's some things that simply can't be simulated. You can simulate the traffic of 1000 users... but you cannot possibly simulate all the things those 1000 users actually DO to mess up a network.

And just because *you* get to avoid those users doesn't mean most of us do, Ryan. ;)

Again, lab experience is certainly worthwhile. But most employers don't truly consider it to be the same as real-world experience. That may not seem wise or fair or just to some of you... but that's just how most employers think.

 

If you don't have real-world experience with it, what can you do other than be truthful with them? Just tell them that you've simulated it in your own lab environment. You could even tell them several different scenarios that you've practiced. That'll still set you apart from those who haven't messed with it at all.

Just because it's not real-world experience doesn't mean it's useless.

 

My take on the cert with no experience debate is that there is a massive difference between gaining a MCSE (7 exams) with little to no experience and say gaing an exchange 03 or 07 cert (1 exam) without having the real world experience to back it up.

Example being, I have over 2 years real world experience in administrating Active directory, implenting group policies, network firewalls, machine imaging, IP telephony, etc, but very little in exchange (we outscoured E-mail not long after I started).

I plan on getting MCSA Messaging, should I then go for a job where they want someone with all the experience of what I have done previously plus exchange experience (which you hazard a guess that your not going to be managing exchange all day) then the cert will surley help me rather than hinder my chances. I understand if I go solely for a exchange admin job then it''s not really going to do me any favours.

Getting a MCSE with no experience is making a rod for your own back, but getting certifed in something you dont have real world experince in is not as bad as some people make out.

 

Just because I'm curious, I thought I'd ask what people (especially BosonMichael) think about people like me who went this way:

*A+ first ( Aug. 2008 )
*Network+ second ( Aug. 2008 )
*MCSA ( Dec. 2008 )
*Associates Degree, Information Technology ( Dec. 2009 )
*Got a job in IT ( Dec. 2009 )
*Security+ ( Mar. 2010 )
*MCSE ( projected summer 2010 )

Do you think I was wrong for going for an MCSA before the job? I tend to think that it wasn't because it was what got me interviews. Putting the certs down (and yes being very upfront about "my lack of experience" which is in quotes because I am recalling all of the things I have seen techs with 10+ years of experience do) is what got people to talk to me, so I think it demonstrated at least some level of proficiency. As I have said before, that opened the door, and I think that was John's original point.

For me, that's what this thread is all about. I didn't start out with CCNA or MCSE; I wanted to prove I knew some things by starting with the basics. I agree with the sentiment that senior certs like MCSE, CCNA, etc. without any sort of experience probably do more harm than good.

This topic is very important to me, especially since the whole "job without experience vs. experience by getting a job" will dog me for years to come. I'm finishing degrees in engineering and I already see it coming:

Them: "Wow! You were an honors student in Mathematics, English, Physics, and Spanish with a strong GPA even while working a full-time job and earning IT certifications! Too bad you don't have any engineering experience. We can't hire you. Go get some experience."
​

Me: "What do you mean? Doesn't a record like that show that I'm capable? That I can learn technical material and learn it well? I mean I have a BSc. in biomedical engineering and MSc. in computer engineering..."​

Them: "Well, all that's fine and dandy, but go get some experience. We clearly don't have the resources to take a chance on someone without experience. I mean, experience is really all that matters in the technical professions. Anyone who is just starting out clearly is a moron and could never prove their worth to us by training!"​

Me: "So what you're saying is that all of that training really doesn't matter at all to help me get in the door because you are unwilling to let me learn and have a chance to prove my knowledge?"​

Them: "Hey, maybe you can be taught!"​

This is of course exaggerated, but the principle is evident: there is no excuse for turning down those who have never had a shot to prove themselves and who took the time to learn and earn credentials to show proficiency. IT certifications are a way for people to show their mettle to start out, and I think it should be considered a positive.

If you feel the same way I do, please speak up. If you don't feel the way I do, I want to know why.

 

Do I think you were "wrong"? Wrong is way too harsh of a word - I don't think you were "wrong", but I would not have recommended it until you had experience for the reasons I've already given. And Microsoft agrees with me, based on their own MCSA recommendations. But it seems to have worked out for you. For others, being overcertified doesn't work out so well.

There's always going to be a few people who beat the odds. I can just about guarantee that there's gonna be some hotshot who gets a CCNA with no experience, grabs a network admin job right after falling off the turnip truck, and they're gonna post, "Hah! In your FACE, BosonMichael!!!" But that single incident proves little when weighed against the other 99 people out of 100 who don't get so lucky.

So... did the MCSA make you overcertified? Yes, but not horribly so. After all, it doesn't take a whole lot of time to get 6 months of server admin experience, depending on what your first employer allows you to tackle.

In any case, does it matter what I think about you getting certified early? You got a job.

Does being overcertified mean you absolutely cannot get a job in IT? Not at all. I simply say that it can work against you more than for you. In your case, with that particular employer, it seemed to work for you. Then again, how do you know it was the certification that tipped the scales to get you the interview and, later, the job? It could have been a superior CV. It could have been your superior interview skills. It could have been the knowledge that you've gained while studying. Hard to say unless your employer told you that your MCSA is the one and only thing that made the difference.

It is possible. However, every career field is different. In fact, the IT career field itself was very different 12 years ago. Back then, an MCSE could get you a job at the drop of a hat. Now, things have changed. So it's hard to say how employers in an entirely different career field are going to view your CV.

Certifications aren't designed to show employers what you want to be doing... they're designed to show employers what you already have experience doing. The certifications themselves do not automagically qualify you to administer servers or network gear.

Your example would happen only if someone without experience were trying for an upper-level job that requires experience. There is an "excuse" for turning down people with certs and no experience: companies can't afford to take a chance on hiring someone without experience to do higher-level jobs that involve mission-critical servers or network gear. You might think that they're wrong for taking that stance, but you have to understand something - they've TRIED your method before of hiring people who "train well". Remember when I said that employers used to give jobs to MCSEs at the drop of a hat? It turns out that a bunch of those MCSEs didn't know jack from squat. So employers developed a negative view about certification without experience.

Worse, braindumps have further eroded confidence in IT certifications. So when someone goes out and get a bunch of certifications without experience, the first thought in many employers' heads isn't, "This guy learns well!"... it's more often, "This guy must have braindumped the cert".

Considering Boson's bread-and-butter training products cover Cisco exams that are NOT entry-level, it would absolutely thrill me to be able to tell people, "Hey, you know what? Certification without experience is OK and it is more likely to help you than harm you." But if I told you guys that, I'd be lying to you simply for monetary gain. Instead, I'd rather help you guys build your careers the right way with a strong foundation... so when you DO become successful, you'll remember the guy who cared enough to give you advice and, perhaps, buy the training products I helped to create.

For those who "train well", I give this advice: go out and get an entry-level job. If you learn quickly, good employers will see it and start giving you more responsibility. With the right company, it doesn't take long. And if you discover that you've signed on with an employer who won't allow you to grow, then it's time to start quietly looking for new opportunities.

Recently, I've had some ideas as to why some people get a good jump in IT and others stagnate (often through no fault of their own). I will probably start a new thread about it in the next few days.

 

I guess a lot of the debate on here is revolving around what we actually see the role of certs as being for in the current climate, and by that I mean what we actually believe personally, not what Microsoft et al place on their websites to cover there backsides.

1. A means of proving the experience you have gained in the workplace on a subject or product.

2. A means of proving knowledge of a subject or product gained either through self study or employment.

3. A means of gaining knowledge on a subject or product.

Personally i'm on the fence between option 2 & 3, it's no secret that I work for a T.P. I see too many people coming through our doors from a non I.T background who then go on to have successful careers in the industry after having gained there knowledge from the certification process for anyone to tell me otherwise.

From speaking to them and their employers it's always been the case, that although the certifications they gained had helped to get them shorlisted for an interview, it was down to their performance on the interview, willingness to learn and that they had a realistic expectation of salary and where they would start out in the company that had landed them the position.

Who have been our most successful candidates that gained employment the quickest ? No experience, must be those who went through our A+ & N+ course right? I'd like that to be the case as I still see some value in them. The reality is though by far the largest amount of people to gain employment had completed the MCSA course.

Yep shock horror.

Who waited the longest before finding employment if at all - you guessed it the A+ & N+ guys. Now before I start getting flamed, i'm not saying that this is right or wrong and i'm just stating the facts as I've seen them in the 3 years I've been involved with this T.P.

But what it does show to me is that a lot of employers do value certs, but just not in the way that is always peddled on internet forums, sure we love them, that's why we're all here, it gives us great pleasure to help out a newb by advising them to save cash, self study and get the latest Mike Meyers and start with the CompTia exams. The employers I've come across though only see the certs as i've stated before, as a means of shortlisting C.V's, showing potential to retain and learn information and to cover ones ass should that new hire inadvertantly hose the network.

 

All of that doesn't surprise me unfortunately, the A+ and N+ in the UK at least are not well known and tend to get ignored by recruiters and hiring managers because they don't actually know what they are or what they entail.

What they do recognise is MCSA, MCSE and CCNA.

Its a crying shame really that the only recruiter I ever met who understood the certification process and gave a stuff about getting it right quit and now works selling advertising for Barnet football club.

IT managers not knowing about them or making the effort to find out when they keep appearing on CVs? laziness. pure and simple.

 

I suppose the people who give advice on forums are senior IT or less senior, and they can give good advice and in that way save us novices money and time of not going for high level certs.
If I pass MCSA that might shortlist me for an interview but then i am applying for entry level jobs they won't ask me questions from MCSA. But it will give me more chance for an interview? I am not sure who is mad here - HR and employers making selections like that, me who is not willing to study at this point for MCSA but it can land me an interview, you giving this advice or others giving completely contra your point advice?

 

I think this is a bit exagurated because from reading job boards it is not as bad as that.

 

I'd have to agree with him, I don't know what job boards your searching but the amount of CompTia certs in demand in the U.K is negligable. Have a search on any of the big jobs boards such as cwjobs etc for your local area. A U.K wide search for CompTia A+ brings up 7 hits of which only 2 are actually A+ roles.

I don't think it's so much the case now that the CompTia certs are as unknown in the U.K as they once were, just that they are seen as too basic and employers are maybe a bit blinkered towards the bigger vendors such as Microsoft as that's what type of shop they are running.

 

It is exaggerated indeed. I am looking for jobs on totaljobs, jobserve, itjobboard etc. But for entry level, support jobs. And my findings are that there are few adds that ask usually like this - MCP, MCSA, MCSE candidate must have at least one of these quals... and that is for entry level job.
Luckily, it is not often a case.
Any way, no metter how great these online forums can be, they are for some individuals marketing tool.