Re: SAGE, certification, and you

[David Parter <dparter@cs.wisc.edu>]

*sigh*

those who have followed this issue for the past several years
know that there are several people who fee very strongly about it
-- on both sides of the issue, and that the various boards have
struggled (battled?) with it.

I am not sure how I feel about the concept. It isn't that
important to me. In fact, I think I'd rather not work for someone
who doesn't understand what I do, and can't evaluate if I am
qualified for the job. But, I'm lucky -- I have a job I like, in
a situation where this really isn't an issue for me.

I know a lot of people liked the idea of the "merit badges". Its like
building the web of trust, but based on technical skill and judgement,
not trust in key signing policies. And it all seems to easy... once the
pool of qualified senior admins is seeded (through mutual recognition --
which is what happens now anyway), I publicly tell everyone who I have
trained in a particular area (sendmail is the example everyone uses for
some reason), and those who trust me, or trust those who trust me, know
that those people are good at sendmail.

But I've been convinced that this just won't work as a formalized system.
There are too many potential conflicts (your boss wants you to sign off
on his sendmail skill. The extent of his sendmail skill is to know that
he should get you to do it -- a good thing, but not the same as being
able to do it himself.  what do you do?)

So, whats the alternative? Some kind of more general certification,
probably "skills test" based. 

ick. 

I generally laugh at CNEs and MSCEs. Being a sysadmin is a lot more than a
particular skill set of the type that can be measured on a multiple-choice
standardized test.

When I hire, I'd much rather rely on the informal web of trust, and what
I get out of the interview. Of course, others have different needs.

I'm also really concerned that this will be a failure. To do it
in any meaningful way will require enormous amounts of energy
from SAGE, and the more I think about it, the more I see it as a
huge drain on SAGE's most valuable resource -- the people. 

As far as I can tell, USENIX has not been able to really handle a much
more modest undertaking: the PGP Key signing service. I got my key signed
in 1996, shortly after it started. My key was never signed for 1997,
despite the fact that I am a member twice (once in my name, because I
think the University should pay the membership fee, and once as a Campus
Representative). Its possible that I lost the "renew" email, but more
likely that it was never sent.

I know it isn't the same as certification, especially for those who want
sysadmins certified like Professional Engineers, but I think a more modest
thing that can be done is to present participants with certificates of
participation for USENIX conference tutorials.  It addresses the needs
of the more "junior" sysadmins for something to hang on their wall, put
on the resume etc. And it promotes Usenix. And it says (to me anyway):

	1) you attended a Usenix event. that shows more awareness
	   of one aspect of the profession than many of the applicants 
	   that I see. (of course, someone had to pay for it)

        2) you took the time to attend a tutorial -- and stayed until 
	   the end (or at least attended the final session).
	   Another bonus point.
	
If you think such a certificate is worthless, then perhaps we need to
put the effort into improving the tutorials (My opinion: some are good,
some need work).

> We kept coming back to the mission statement phrase "advancement of systems
> administration as a profession" and what that implies.  After a rather
> vociferous debate we agreed (some more cheerfully than others) that a
> "profession" entails certification - careers without such things are
> generally referred to as "trades" (think of the difference between 
> MDs and morticians, for example).

I don't think a profession requires certification. I think most trades
require certification. How does SAGE certification compare with a
barber's license? There are other things we could be working on to
"advance systems administration as a profession."

As Hal mentioned, the short topics series is a good thing, which
I think advances the profession. In addition to the effort already
underway to produce more in the series, A campaign to get those books
into libraries, career planning centers, in-house training programs (for
those in settings with in-house training), and the hands of our managers
(and their managers) would do more to make non-sysadmins realize that
there is more to this than (as Tom Limoncelli put it in his LISA talk)
"being a systems clerk".

my late-night rambling thoughts,

	--david

david parter                                         dparter@cs.wisc.edu
associate director, computer systems lab    voice: 608-262-0608/262-2389
university of wisconsin                                fax: 608-262-6626
computer sciences department