What is the current purpose of this list?
Keith Braithwaite
I'm here by virtue of Ron's blog posts and am in agreement with his
suggested principle that if soup is going to happen anyway then
probably best to do what it takes that the flavour is a little more to
one's liking.
Having skimmed the post and documents I have a question: what is the
current purpose of this group? It's written "Agile Developer Skills"
on the bar at the top, but a lot of the discussion seems to be around
defining a new product line for the Scrum Alliance to sell. What is
the goal?
Keith
Ron Jeffries
wrote:
The Scrum Alliance is working on
A program that will help Scrum teams be more successful by
improving developer practices,
which will no doubt become a product with some value returned to
the Alliance.
Some subset of us was invited directly by SA to help formulate this,
and that subset invited the rest, and now everyone.
Our goal, in some mixture is to
Come up with a clear statement of what a cert is and is not;
Come up with a statement that improvement is a lifetime thing;
Delineate as well as possible the key things a person should know;
and, for at least some members of the group, probably come up with
courses and consulting programs relating to those key things,
since that is, after all, what some of us already do.
Most of what we have said together and agreed among ourselves about
is up here. People can help us understand what should be done by
contributing.
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
www.xprogramming.com/blog
A lot of preconceptions can be dismissed when you actually
try something out. -- Bruce Eckel
Alan Shalloway
Alliance.
My concern is what is the risk of my participating and then the Scrum
Alliance sets up a certification program with their instructors and
those of us not certified in teaching through the SA will have
essentially set up a competitor for ourselves. I don't mind helping
individual consultants or even other companies (e.g., Object Mentor -
whom I've gotten a lot more value than I've given them) but if the
Scrum Alliance takes and starts offering a developer certification
program based on the work here I am not sure that is a positive thing
overall for the industry.
I am clear I can choose not to participate, but I think the idea of
developer certification is a good idea if done in certain ways and
would therefore like to participate.
Is the correct attitude that we're just a bunch of concerned
practitioners/consultants speaking to certification and anybody
anywhere can take advantage of it?
Alan Shalloway
Elizabeth Keogh
If the Scrum Alliance is going to sell it anyway (and given the
success of CSM / CST, it seems likely), I'd like to help make it
palatable. As long as it's nutritious, I don't care much what it
tastes like.
Cheers,
Liz.
--
Elizabeth Keogh
l...@lunivore.com
http://lizkeogh.com
http://jbehave.org
Robert Martin
several months. I have helped the current effort to a certain extent;
but I've also been skeptical of it. The following is an attempt to
explain just why I am skeptical.
=============
You can easily certify that someone knows the Java String API. The
knowledge is objective. The tests are unambiguous, quick, and easy to
administer. The proof is something everyone can agree with.
You can not easily certify skill. A quick and easy test demonstrates
nothing about skill. Skill is best measured through long-term
observation of results.
The certification of knowledge is a measurement of the number of facts
that the subject has committed to memory.
The certification of skill is a measurement of how the subject uses
those facts, other facts, and many other talents and abilities, to
solve _difficult_ problems.
As a developer I am not suspicious of a test of knowledge. Go ahead
and test it. I know what I know, and I know I'll do well. Indeed I
_want_ you to test my knowledge. I know I'll knock your socks off.
As a developer I am deeply suspicious of a test of my skill. How do I
know your test will actually test what I'm skilled at? Why should I
believe that the skills I have are the skills that you value? Why
should I believe that you are intelligent and perceptive enough to
understand my skills? How do I know you aren't a religious zealot who
confuses skill with doctrine? How do I know you won't fail me just
because we disagree?
So as a developer I would not submit to a test that claims to certify
my skill. If you want to know if I'm skilled, you can look at the
projects I've worked on in the past. You can talk to the teams I've
worked in. You can look at the trail of failures and successes that
I've left behind. (Sometimes failures say more about skill than
successes!) And then you can give me a chance to prove my skills to
you in a project.
But I'm not taking a test that you think measures my skill.
=============
Now I know that we aren't truly talking about a test that certifies
skill. But I also think that, at a much deeper level, we are (see
the name of this email list). Or at least it will be perceived as such.
Keith Braithwaite
On Sep 10, 11:10 pm, Elizabeth Keogh <l...@lunivore.com> wrote:
> As long as it's nutritious, I don't care much what it
> tastes like.
I know from personal experience that it is perfectly possible to live
on brown rice and baked beans and vitamin pills--but I wouldn't wan to
do that ever again.
keith
Keith Braithwaite
On Sep 10, 10:56 pm, Ron Jeffries <ronjeffr...@acm.org> wrote:
> The Scrum Alliance is working on
> A program that will help Scrum teams be more successful by
> improving developer practices,
the word) in helping non-Scrum teams be more successful, but do the
members of this group?
Which leads me to ask, re this:
> courses and consulting programs relating to those key things,
> since that is, after all, what some of us already do.
not plugged in to the Scrum Alliance?
This is not a flippant question, and has a bearing on how this group
proceeds. For example, I've spoken to some of the Kanban folks about
their intended certification and they were quite strongly intending
that there should be multiple competing certification bodies. The
Scrum Alliance, by contrast, is a closed shop and operates a monopoly
on Scrum certification.
Which way does the intention run here?
Keith
Ron Jeffries
wrote:
> That seems like a low bar to me. I was once a post-graduate student so
> I know from personal experience that it is perfectly possible to live
> on brown rice and baked beans and vitamin pills--but I wouldn't wan to
> do that ever again.
Of course not! You forgot the ramen noodles!
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
www.xprogramming.com/blog
Any errors you find in this are the work of Secret Villains,
whose mad schemes will soon be revealed. -- Wil McCarthy
Ron Jeffries
wrote:
>> The Scrum Alliance is working on
>> A program that will help Scrum teams be more successful by
>> improving developer practices,
> I understand the the Scrum Alliance has no interest (in any sense of
> the word) in helping non-Scrum teams be more successful, but do the
> members of this group?
I think our records suggest that we have that interest, yes.
> Which leads me to ask, re this:
>> and, for at least some members of the group, probably come up with
>> courses and consulting programs relating to those key things,
>> since that is, after all, what some of us already do.
> What about those of us who do indeed do those those things but who are
> not plugged in to the Scrum Alliance?
What about those of us? I'm not sure I undersand the question. If we
say something good, here or elsewhere, about what developers need to
know, do, learn ... I expect that would be available to everyone.
However ...
> This is not a flippant question, and has a bearing on how this group
> proceeds. For example, I've spoken to some of the Kanban folks about
> their intended certification and they were quite strongly intending
> that there should be multiple competing certification bodies. The
> Scrum Alliance, by contrast, is a closed shop and operates a monopoly
> on Scrum certification.
> Which way does the intention run here?
Speaking just for myself (and Boskone, of course, which goes without
saying except that I just said it), I have grave doubts about the
notion of skills certification. I am always on the cusp between
pulling out of this effort and repudiating it, and trying to guide
it to something "not too abysmal".
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
www.xprogramming.com/blog
Thousands of years ago, the first man discovered how to make fire.
He was probably burned at the stake he had taught his brothers to
light - Howard Roark (The Fountainhead, Ayn Rand)
Ron Jeffries
wrote:
> I have no problem with some value being returned to the Scrum
> Alliance.
> My concern is what is the risk of my participating and then the Scrum
> Alliance sets up a certification program with their instructors and
> those of us not certified in teaching through the SA will have
> essentially set up a competitor for ourselves. I don't mind helping
> individual consultants or even other companies (e.g., Object Mentor -
> whom I've gotten a lot more value than I've given them) but if the
> Scrum Alliance takes and starts offering a developer certification
> program based on the work here I am not sure that is a positive thing
> overall for the industry.
Yes, I very much share the concern. And certainly it is the
intention of the Scrum Alliance to set up a program, and since they
asked us to help, I suppose they plan to use what we are doing.
I, too, am not sure this is a good thing. I hope we'll be able to
have a productive discussion about that, as well as the meat of how
developers should gain skill, and how we might assess it.
> I am clear I can choose not to participate, but I think the idea of
> developer certification is a good idea if done in certain ways and
> would therefore like to participate.
I'm not so sure even of this and would like to hear more support for
the idea.
> Is the correct attitude that we're just a bunch of concerned
> practitioners/consultants speaking to certification and anybody
> anywhere can take advantage of it?
That's my theory ... and I expect that the Scrum Alliance may well
take some or all of what's here, or some new thing, and run with it.
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
www.xprogramming.com/blog
Here is Edward Bear, coming downstairs now, bump, bump, bump, on the back
of his head. It is, as far as he knows, the only way of coming downstairs,
but sometimes he feels that there really is another way, if only he could
stop bumping for a moment and think of it. And then he feels that perhaps
there isn't. -- A. A. Milne
Ron Jeffries
wrote:
> Now I know that we aren't truly talking about a test that certifies
> skill. But I also think that, at a much deeper level, we are (see
> the name of this email list). Or at least it will be perceived as such.
Very very good points. I have no doubt that it will be perceived as
that, in the same way that the CSM is (and in the same way that the
CSM isn't so perceived, i.e. by people with a clue, it won't be).
I remain uncertain ...
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
www.xprogramming.com/blog
If another does not intend offense, it is wrong for me to seek it;
if another does indeed intend offense, it is foolish for me to permit it.
-- Kelly Easterley
Alan Shalloway
Alan Shalloway, CEO, Sr. Consultant
Net Objectives. Achieving Enterprise Agility
425-269-8991
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
______________________________________________________________________
Keith Braithwaite
>
> Speaking just for myself (and Boskone, of course, which goes without
> saying except that I just said it), I have grave doubts about the
> notion of skills certification.
is misunderstood and (allowed to be) misrepresented.
I think of some certifications that I know well (because I have them):
Heriot-Watt University certifies that I was matriculated there and
that I sat a number of examinations in Mathematics and Physics on
certain days and demonstrated a specific degree of ability and
knowledge at and of those subjects by that means. Also that I did a
research project and wrote a dissertation about it that met a certain
standard. They conspicuously do not certify that I have retained any
level of skill in or knowledge of those subjects, nor that I could
perform at any given level of competence in them today. Heriot-Watt
taught and examined and certified me. Their authority to do so derives
from a warrant from the Queen and the respect (or otherwise) that the
certification grants me depends on their continued standing amongst
other universities--and not on anything that I do.
The City and Guilds of London Institute certifies that on a certain
day I demonstrated the ability to write, compile and successfully run
a COBOL program to solve a problem of a certain level of complexity.
And nothing else. As far as I can recall, C&G did not train nor assess
me but presumably did accredit the company which did both.
The United Kingdom Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority certify that
on a certain day I demonstrated the ability to ride a motorcycle to a
certain degree of proficiency. That's an interesting one, since anyone
else who's interested will assume that this means that I can still do
so. For example, I was allowed to hire a bike in the Kingdom of
Morocco on that basis (or, more accurately, I could be insured to ride
a bike in Morocco on that basis and therefore the lessor was willing
to hire one to me). The DVLA did not assess me itself. A different
agency, the Driving Standards Authority licensed the trainer who did
train me, not sure who licensed the examiner.
The Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers certified that
over the space of a certain six-week period I demonstrated that I had
acquired a range of knowledge and skills useful to a Software
Engineer. This is also interesting, as the IEE no longer exists but
the certificate is still worth something. The IEE itself did not
assess me, but it did accredit the university department which did.
The Scrum Alliance certifies, as far as I can tell, that I sat in a
room for two days and that the trainer who arranged that forwarded
part of his fee to them. And that's an interesting one, too. Since I
have not subsequently paid any subscription fees to the SA presumably
they no longer certify that I did that. It's hard to know. People very
definitely assume that by virtue of having/done/had that certification
I can (and WILL) definitely do certain things on a project. They are
mistaken
Which of these models is this mooted Scrum developer certification
going to be most like?
Keith
Robert Martin
Keith Braithwaite
On Sep 11, 1:38 pm, Robert Martin <uncle...@objectmentor.com> wrote:
>
> You can not easily certify skill. A quick and easy test demonstrates
> nothing about skill. Skill is best measured through long-term
> those facts, other facts, and many other talents and abilities, to
> solve _difficult_ problems.
that the IEE Certificate I mentioned in a previous post did something
useful and conrete. Here's what I had to do to get it:
Solve a small simulation problem in C++. I got extra credit because I
kept my source under version control.
Devise and build a small relational database schema to handle a
business problem, put a VB UI on it.
Implement a very (very!) simple network protocol on top of sockets in
C. I got extra credit because I made the documentation of my protocol
look like a man page.
Model a problem domain using OMT
Work in a small team to plan and execute a small development project
to build a small app in C++
Write an essay showing an understanding of some well-known IT project
disasters and their causes.
I'd argue that any one of these things demonstrates a certain level of
skill, and all of them together show a reasonably broad range of
skills too. Does it demonstrate mad crazy 1eet skillzor? No, it does
not. Is that the only level of "skill" we would ever want to
recognize?
Or, consider the City and Guilds certificate that I mentioned. C&G
seem not to do programming any more, but what they do do is practical
qualifications for people who do practical, useful jobs. And these
qualifications indicate that a certain level of skill has been
exhibited.
>But I'm not taking a test that you think measures my skill.
things you're afraid of. I'd suggest that someone working an actual
profession would not, for example, be afraid that the assessor might
be "a religious zealot who confuses skill with doctrine" because
actual professions rarely feature such people and they even more
rarely become the assessors of certifications.
Anyway, in summary, I'm not sure I understand what's so special about
programming that assessing skill in it should be so difficult when
professionals in so many other fields seem to be able to do so.
I do agree that "a test" can't effectively recognize skill. After all,
the professions that do certify for skill don't do it that way.
Keith
Adrian Howard
On 11 Sep 2009, at 16:52, Robert Martin wrote:
> Alan,
>
> Possibly. The difference is that potential SMs were *eager* to be
> certified. Developers, I think, will reject the concept out of hand
> (the same way they tend to reject CSMs).
>
> CSMs come from a PM background. The CSM body of knowledge is small
> and easy to apply. Developer skill is an entirely different ball-
> game.
One hesitates to bring in the martial arts analogies again... but how
do aikido/karate/etc. certify things like green/brown/black belt or
whatever?
That would seem like it would have to be skill based?
Adrian
--
http://quietstars.com - twitter.com/adrianh - delicious.com/adrianh
Adrian Howard
On 11 Sep 2009, at 16:06, Keith Braithwaite wrote:
> The United Kingdom Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority certify that
> on a certain day I demonstrated the ability to ride a motorcycle to a
> certain degree of proficiency. That's an interesting one, since anyone
> else who's interested will assume that this means that I can still do
> so.
Yeah - that one scares me. Despite the fact that:
a) I've not driven a car in... erm... 16 years now
b) When I did drive - the vast majority was in the US (by probably 2
orders of magnitude.)
it's perfectly legal for me to drive in the UK...
To add another one to the list - my recollection of my younger
brothers engineering apprenticeship was that he spent four years with
a mixture of class room teaching and actually "doing the job" under a
variety of different professionals. Last time I talked about it with
him he still found this much more useful than the degree he did later.
David J Bland
The comments were unfortunately lost in my recent blog conversion, but in a nutshell growth in usage of the phrase "certified scrum master" and its variants were impressive. I don't believe it is a fad, and I imagine any agile developer certification would yield similar results.
-David
David J Bland
http://www.7thpixel.net
Elizabeth Keogh
Eating baked beans allowed you to survive, while learning, for long
enough to start returning on that investment of time and penury.
Eventually you were able to collect different recipes with the same
nutritious values, then you were able to invent and blend your own.
I'm only looking for Shu on the Shu-Ha-Ri scale. I would like to see
enough technical practices in place for Agile to survive the initial
adoption and allow learning to really kick in. If someone wants to
make money from that... well, this list is public.
mheusser
> do aikido/karate/etc. certify things like green/brown/black belt or
> whatever?
My wife is 1st degree black belt in Tae Kwon Do. If I recall
correctly, she had to demonstrate a series of 'forms' movements and
break a certain number of boards with her hands while an instructor
watched.
One way to do this:
Have a dozen different problems.
Give the student an interesting problem and a team member and see if
they can code a solution in any language. Make the problem vague
enough that they have to engage a customer but can build it in one
day. Put the solution on the interent. Swear them to secrecy for one
year on the problem; add a new problem and retire an old one after a
year.
This has the added incentive that if they try to cheat by memorizing
all the answers, they will have internalized a very large collection
of good coding and tester patterns.
This is the style of test issued by the FAA for it's private pilot
written examination. The questions and answers are printed in
advance; you get something like 100 questions out of a possible
5,000. (The big book of questions is four inches thick, IIRC)
regards,
--heusser
Patrick Wilson-Welsh
I agree mostly with Matt below on the nature of testing systems. We can learn a lot about how pilots get certified.
But pilots get more from their industry than just testing systems. They get entire learning systems.
The FAA probably has pretty good data somewhere about how well pilots are likely to perform who have (A) flown for X * 1000 hours and (B) have been accompanied by certified pilots and (C) have answered the 100 out of the possible 5000 questions correctly and (D) get re-certified at some interval. And while their failure rates and level of professionalism are, I suggest, much higher than ours, planes do crash, and there are still idiots and nitwits piloting airplanes. In that sense, certification may be a useful marketing term, but it's a lousy guarantee.
What do we really want our community to accomplish? I'll speak for myself.
I want our community to tend to generate more genuinely skilled and deeply committed Software Craftsman than it currently does, expressed as a percentage of all of the folks in the world who call themselves programmers. I want it to be more straightforward and affordable than it is for individual programmers who want that level of skill and comittment to be able to acquire much of the necessary knowledge, and then perform, in some controlled way, many of the necessary skills, in a "performance" that can be assessed, partly objectively, and partly subjectively. I want learning systems and testing systems. I want something that scales better than Corey Haines driving around from shop to shop in his car, as courageous as Corey's choice is.
I have a metaphor to consider for "open-book" software learning systems. Think of a through-hike of the Appalachian Trail (described hilariously by Bill Bryson, BTW, in "A Walk in the Woods.") If you actually accomplish an AT thru hike, then you have, of necessity, learned many things about hiking, backpacking, a bit of wildlife survival, stamina, perseverance, problem solving, etc. You face a lot of nasty challenges thru-hiking the AT, ranging from bears and sudden storms to injuries and stolen food. You cope and you learn.
Speaking again for myself, I want a series of "agile programming ordeals" or thru-hikes, of increasing scale, complexity, and perverse/pathological challenge. Hard stuff with high failure rates.
I want students to have affordable access to these ordeals.
I want a subjective/objective means of assessing that someone more-or-less survived an ordeal. Basically, a pass/fail grade. We can use something like "you'll be getting a hundred questions out of the following 5000," as Matt describes below.
And I want to give each such survivor of each such ordeal nothing more than a piece of paper and a T-Shirt that say something like "The Bear Didn't Get Me."
And I want to send hundreds and dozens of such T-Shirts out into the industry, so that the industry can then start to tell us how challenging, useful, and predictive the survivial of these ordeals tend to be. Indeed, I content only the industry can tell us how much people who have survived any learning system tend to have learned, and tend to perform on the job.
So let's concentrate at least as much on the learning systems as we do on the testing mechanism. And let's not have our test "certify" anything more than this per learning experience: "This person survived this ordeal; we suggest this has some meaning." Then let's have the industry tell us what it means for 1000 programmers to have accomplished that, and refine our learning and testing systems and mechanisms accordingly for the next 1000, and so on.
We do not have Object Certified Programming, after all, much less Object Certified Programmers, nor Object Certified programming languages.
I suggest that what we really want, at the root of it, is better ways for us as a community to help programmers learn software craftsmanship, and better ways to encourage the entire industry to prefer such programmers. Testing is really a pretty small part of this larger problem, as critical and thorny as the testing part is.
--Patrick
> ------- patrick welsh twitter: patrickwelsh blog: patrickwilsonwelsh.com
Adrian Howard
On 11 Sep 2009, at 20:47, mheusser wrote:
> My wife is 1st degree black belt in Tae Kwon Do. If I recall
> correctly, she had to demonstrate a series of 'forms' movements and
> break a certain number of boards with her hands while an instructor
> watched.
Is there some kind of global organisation that authorises the
instructor to award the belt? A competing set of organisations? No
organisation at all?
(just curious)
Charlie Poole
Like a few hundred others, I signed up here just now because Ron
said it was a Good Thing. I saw this thread and figured it was
one I should read first.
So I have a question: What *is* the purpose of this list *now*?
Is it to develop a certification program?
Is it do decide if such a program is a good idea?
Is it to feed into an SA program?
Is it to possibly lead to an independent program?
Could it lead to a non-certification-based skill set?
The name of the group suggests it's much broader than just
helping the SA folks come up with a program that will be
accepted. I'm interested in that broader context, so long
as it's real and not just a label.
I'm personally not interested in helping SA market a program,
although I will defend your right to do so if that's what
you're doing.
Charlie
> -----Original Message-----
> From: agile-devel...@googlegroups.com
> [mailto:agile-devel...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of
> Elizabeth Keogh
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 10:24 AM
> To: agile-devel...@googlegroups.com
Adam.Sroka
On Sep 11, 12:47 pm, mheusser <matt.heus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > One hesitates to bring in the martial arts analogies again... but how
> > do aikido/karate/etc. certify things like green/brown/black belt or
> > whatever?
>
> Performance-based assessments.
>
> My wife is 1st degree black belt in Tae Kwon Do. If I recall
> correctly, she had to demonstrate a series of 'forms' movements and
> break a certain number of boards with her hands while an instructor
> watched.
>
laugh at black belts unless they have a reputation of proven
experience in the ring/street. Same problem here.
> One way to do this:
>
> Have a dozen different problems.
>
> Give the student an interesting problem and a team member and see if
> they can code a solution in any language. Make the problem vague
> enough that they have to engage a customer but can build it in one
> day. Put the solution on the interent. Swear them to secrecy for one
> year on the problem; add a new problem and retire an old one after a
> year.
>
developers actually do. This topic a topic that I have discussed
before on other lists, and it is near and dear to my heart.
Assuming the developer could demonstrate a working solution with all
of the tests, does this mean he should be a "Certified Agile Developer
(TM)?" I think that this demonstrates that he can solve problems and
write tests, but I think there are a number of other skills he needs
to be successful.
> This has the added incentive that if they try to cheat by memorizing
> all the answers, they will have internalized a very large collection
> of good coding and tester patterns.
>
> This is the style of test issued by the FAA for it's private pilot
> written examination. The questions and answers are printed in
> advance; you get something like 100 questions out of a possible
> 5,000. (The big book of questions is four inches thick, IIRC)
>
The parts where the student has to fly a plane and land it - first
with a teacher, then by himself, then on instruments.
Given a problem, can you work with a team to decompose the problem
into stories, write acceptance tests, test-drive the solution, and
integrate and deploy it. Supposing you could have a mini-iteration and
do all that as part of a course, then you have the problem of how to
accommodate all of the different languages and tool sets (Like trying
to train airline pilots and cessna pilots and helicopter pilots and
ship pilots and astronauts...)
Adrian Howard
On 12 Sep 2009, at 01:09, Adam.Sroka wrote:
> On Sep 11, 12:47 pm, mheusser <matt.heus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> One hesitates to bring in the martial arts analogies again... but
>>> how
>>> do aikido/karate/etc. certify things like green/brown/black belt or
>>> whatever?
>>
>> Performance-based assessments.
>>
>> My wife is 1st degree black belt in Tae Kwon Do. If I recall
>> correctly, she had to demonstrate a series of 'forms' movements and
>> break a certain number of boards with her hands while an instructor
>> watched.
Matt - I'm guessing that this depends on a pre-existing relationship
of some kind? Or can anybody walk off the street and demand to be
graded as black belt?
> I wonder how your wife would do in the UFC? Seriously, real fighters
> laugh at black belts unless they have a reputation of proven
> experience in the ring/street. Same problem here.
Adam - I don't think it is the same problem :-)
I'm not interested in whether somebody with a Tae Kwon Do black belt
can beat everybody up. Nobody I know who is into martial arts (I'm not
myself BTW) has that as a primary motivation.
I'm interested in how the Tae Kwon Do (or whatever) _skill_ is learned
and graded - and how that grading infrastructure works. The people I
know who are into martial arts seem to take the grading system
seriously, work hard at it, and respect the people have have achieved
certain levels. Features lacking in most certification programs in the
computing arena.
I'm just wondering if there is anything to learn there?
For example, I remember overhearing a conversation years ago when a
couple of folk at uni were arguing about the various merits of two
different schools of some martial art (I forget which). I'm not even
sure if the "schools" referred to physical institutions/teacher or a
more philosophical divide. Could there be a ScrumSchool / XPSchool /
RonNChetKickAssSchool / whatever?
Dunno.
Adam Sroka
>
>
> On 12 Sep 2009, at 01:09, Adam.Sroka wrote:
>
>> On Sep 11, 12:47 pm, mheusser <matt.heus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> One hesitates to bring in the martial arts analogies again... but
>>>> how
>>>> do aikido/karate/etc. certify things like green/brown/black belt or
>>>> whatever?
>>>
>>> Performance-based assessments.
>>>
>>> My wife is 1st degree black belt in Tae Kwon Do. If I recall
>>> correctly, she had to demonstrate a series of 'forms' movements and
>>> break a certain number of boards with her hands while an instructor
>>> watched.
>
> Matt - I'm guessing that this depends on a pre-existing relationship
> of some kind? Or can anybody walk off the street and demand to be
> graded as black belt?
>
The colored belts used in many modern styles were invented to promote
a sort of tiered study. The idea is precisely to increase the length
of time that a student will stick around (And keep paying) so that
they have enough time to actually learn something. In traditional
Asian cultures you showed up to study and they abused the hell out of
you, and if you didn't quit they eventually started teaching you stuff
(At which point you were unlikely to leave.)
>> I wonder how your wife would do in the UFC? Seriously, real fighters
>> laugh at black belts unless they have a reputation of proven
>> experience in the ring/street. Same problem here.
>
> Adam - I don't think it is the same problem :-)
>
> I'm not interested in whether somebody with a Tae Kwon Do black belt
> can beat everybody up. Nobody I know who is into martial arts (I'm not
> myself BTW) has that as a primary motivation.
>
The point I am trying to make is that there is a clear disconnect
between achieving some belt level and achieving competence in a real
world skill. Most black belts cannot apply what they have learned
outside of the controlled environment of the dojo, and many white
belts could mop the floor with them based on natural ability and
competitive drive.
So, if you want a model that guarantees that people stick around for a
long time, pay some money, and can't demonstrate any useful skills
from it, then belts are probably a good thing to mimic. Incidentally
most certification systems do fit this model as well.
> I'm interested in how the Tae Kwon Do (or whatever) _skill_ is learned
> and graded - and how that grading infrastructure works. The people I
> know who are into martial arts seem to take the grading system
> seriously, work hard at it, and respect the people have have achieved
> certain levels. Features lacking in most certification programs in the
> computing arena.
>
Because it's a lot of fun, it's interesting, and it takes a lot of
work. There is a real sense that you are progressing and getting
somewhere and that you are working hard to achieve that. It can also
be a competitive sport.
> I'm just wondering if there is anything to learn there?
>
I doubt it. I like the mixed martial arts model better which is why I
brought it up. Your level/belt/rank/whatever is mostly determined by
your ability to compete successfully against people at that same
level. You only get a black belt in BJJ when you can roll with other
black belts.
I'm not sure that applies to software either, but, at least insofar as
we should be examining applied skills and not just the ability to
follow directions and stick around (In which case we can certify my
dog.)
> For example, I remember overhearing a conversation years ago when a
> couple of folk at uni were arguing about the various merits of two
> different schools of some martial art (I forget which). I'm not even
> sure if the "schools" referred to physical institutions/teacher or a
> more philosophical divide. Could there be a ScrumSchool / XPSchool /
> RonNChetKickAssSchool / whatever?
>
I hope not. That just leads to politics and infighting. The last thing
I want to hear is a "my school/teacher is better than yours." We
already have some of that with the whole Scrum vs. XP vs. Lean vs.
whatever is the best method nonsense.
mheusser
'school' of Tae Kwon Do. There are, if I recall correctly, two or
three different (somewhat) competing schools. It is these schools
that organize the competitions that award black-belt. (Schools are
legal entities)
Black-belts then typically on to earn additional evels, and may
eventually make their own local schools, the kind with a building and
a sign on the door. Black-belts take in students in the form of the
commercial karate school most of us are familiar with.
In order to test for black-belt, the student must have earned brown-
belt under the study of someone who has previously earned black-belt.
It typically takes ~2 hours f practice per week, plus practice on your
own, for ~3 years.
(About a year ago, people started to approach me for test mentoring.
I tried to work with them but found an alarming number really just
wanted a better job, a work from home gig, speaking 'connections',
etc. So I started to give them a test challenge and see who would
rise to it. Those that did rise to the challenge, I took on as
'students')
Eventually I made up a name for it: Miagi-Do Testing.
Thus, this maritial-arts metaphor is the basic model I am using.
Miagi-Do is a non-commercial, zero profit, intenet-and-conference
based school I started running about 6 months ago. We intend to go
public this fall.
The 'schooling' is mentoring, performance, and challenge based, with
more information to come. Because it's zero profit, I expect to be
able to take on a maximum of five students at a time, and mentor them
for about a year to take the black-belt exam --- then it'll be about a
year or two before they can take on students.
So I doubt this can 'scale' the way the scrum alliance would like it
to, but I think it could have a positive impact on the testing
industry. If we could borrow some of the ideas from the martial arts,
that might be ... nice.
regards,
--heusser
Peter Stevens
I'd like to add a certification model: Pilots licensing. (I'm
describing the US FAA Model, the European JAR model is somewhat
different, but not having a JAR license, I'm not familiar with it. The
description is also slightly simplified).
A pilot is certified at 3 levels: Private, Commercial, Air Transport
("Advanced Commercial"). Each certification level is a prerequisite
for the subsequent level.
In order to be licensed as a private pilot, a candidate has to:
1) present evidence of experience - a log book of his/her flight
activities
2) present evidence of instruction from an FAA Certified Flight
Instructor (instruction by a non-CFI does not count)
3) pass a written test of knowledge - the FAA creates the test.
4) pass an oral test and a flight test with an FAA Designated
Examiner. The FAA certifies the examiner and defines the standards for
the tests, but does not actually administer the tests.
There is also a "fast track" to certification, in which the FAA
certifies the Flight School and all training is done through that
flight school
Once a pilot, the certificate holder has to maintain "currency" i.e.
have recent experience:
1) to carry passengers, a pilot must have 3 take offs and landings in
the last 90 days (self certifying).
2) to fly at all, a pilot must have completed a flight review from a
CFI within the last 24 months. Again, the FAA certifies the instructor
and defines standards for the review.
So there are a number of questions which must be answered in relation
to the certification process:
1) What body of knowledge must be mastered?
2) What constitutes mastery?
3) How does a candidate demonstrate this mastery (and thereby achieve
certification)?
4) What formal training is required?
5) Who is authorized to give this training?
6) What experience is required?
7) What proof is required?
8) Who is authorized to certify candidates?
9) What must the certifying person/agency do to get and keep that
certification?
Which brings to your question: Which of these questions are we here to
answer, and can we answer any of them without addressing all of them?
Cheers,
Peter
mheusser
On Sep 11, 8:09 pm, "Adam.Sroka" <adam.sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I wonder how your wife would do in the UFC? Seriously, real fighters
> laugh at black belts unless they have a reputation of proven
> experience in the ring/street. Same problem here.
>
it /is/ about, I believe they do a good job of evaluating.
>
> I am more interested in the later parts of that same certification.
> The parts where the student has to fly a plane and land it - first
> with a teacher, then by himself, then on instruments.
>
If we had more open source development, or more apprenticeships, I
could see it working. If we could have apprenticeships be standard,
like internships/residence for medical doctors, I can see us coming
close to this ideal.
But I doubt that is in scope for this scrum alliance proposal.
> Given a problem, can you work with a team to decompose the problem
> into stories, write acceptance tests, test-drive the solution, and
> integrate and deploy it. Supposing you could have a mini-iteration and
> do all that as part of a course, then you have the problem of how to
> accommodate all of the different languages and tool sets (Like trying
> to train airline pilots and cessna pilots and helicopter pilots and
> ship pilots and astronauts...)
You might even combine it with something like 'givecamp' to create an
environment with real problems, real customers, software that can be
published and evaluated in public, etc.
Do you think you could convince industry to go for it? And if yes,
what would it take?
--heusser
xndev.blogspot.com
Ryan Riley
I doubt it. I like the mixed martial arts model better which is why Ibrought it up. Your level/belt/rank/whatever is mostly determined by
your ability to compete successfully against people at that same
level. You only get a black belt in BJJ when you can roll with other
black belts.
I'm not sure that applies to software either, but, at least insofar as
we should be examining applied skills and not just the ability to
follow directions and stick around (In which case we can certify my
dog.)
Abby Fichtner
still wondering if we're answering the question as to what the purpose
of this list is.
I must be honest, I have no burning desire to help the Scrum Alliance
make more money. Not opposed to it, but not something I am going to
jump to spend my free time on.
What I DO have a burning desire for is helping improve the skill and
craftsmanship of software developers.
I keep thinking, it's funny we should go through all this trouble to
certify because we typically can tell within 30 minutes of talking to
someone if they're great software developers. It's the people who are
really passionate about what they do. Who are consistently going over
& above to keep up their skills. Who get involved in conversations
such as this one and look for ways they can contribute to advancing
the state of our craft.
And so I like the idea that we find a way to reward that behavior. Not
as a 1 time certification, but as an ongoing progression of continuous
learning.
And I love the idea that we could receive some type of "merit badges"
for such that could generate excitement and encourage others to follow
this behavior, which would in turn help raise the level of
craftsmanship in software as more people got involved.
But the question is - is this even within the scope of this
discussion? :)
Abby
--
http://TheHackerChickBlog.com -- @HackerChick
On Sep 11, 5:00 pm, Patrick Wilson-Welsh
Ted Young
Keith Braithwaite
> What I DO have a burning desire for is helping improve the skill and
> craftsmanship of software developers.
higher, too. And yet I wonder if all this high-minded stuff about
improving the craft is missing the point.
Doctors (the UK) don't get their General Medical Council ticket out of
a need for self-improvement, they do it because medicine is a closed
shop. Pilots don't go through all the rigmarole that Peter describes
for the sense of mastery, they do it so that they can make a living
from flying at all.
But no-one in the software industry can stomach the idea that anyone
might have to demonstrate that they are competent _before_ embarking
on a career charging people money for code. And no-one buying code
seems to care. Inference: what we do isn't really that important.
> I keep thinking, it's funny we should go through all this trouble to
> certify because we typically can tell within 30 minutes of talking to
> someone if they're great software developers.
quickly. I sometimes think that the purpose of many recruitment
processes is to stop hiring managers making snap decisions.
What I would really like is a certification that makes hiring easier.
That's non-trivial. This is what we currently do in my company which
we look to hire a new consultant:
http://peripateticaxiom.blogspot.com/2008/09/programming-interview-questions.html
it's gruelling for all concerned. My business unit has "Agile" in the
name so a certification for, as it says at the top of this page "Agile
Developer Skills" might be very useful to me, if I believed in it.
There are lots of other certifications with names like "$vendor
Certified $technology Developer" and in my experience they are all
rubbish.
Keith
Adam Sroka
>
>
>
> On Sep 11, 8:09 pm, "Adam.Sroka" <adam.sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I wonder how your wife would do in the UFC? Seriously, real fighters
>> laugh at black belts unless they have a reputation of proven
>> experience in the ring/street. Same problem here.
>>
>
> As Adrian implied, Tae Kwon Do isn't about beating people up. What
> it /is/ about, I believe they do a good job of evaluating.
>
MMA isn't about beating people up either. It is a competitive (And
lucrative, at least for the top few percent) sport. Tae Kwon Do is
also a competitive sport (Though no one makes any money at it.) The
difference is that MMA fighters are judged solely by their ability to
compete or to coach others to compete. Whereas, TKD belt levels have
little or nothing to do with competition. TKD belt levels have to do
with being able to reproduce movements of dubious actual usefulness in
a way that displays some coordination and lots of rote memorization.
In any case, I dispute the usefulness of this metaphor entirely.
>>
>> I am more interested in the later parts of that same certification.
>> The parts where the student has to fly a plane and land it - first
>> with a teacher, then by himself, then on instruments.
>>
>
> Hey; that's be great ... and it's a non-trivial problem to evaluate.
> If we had more open source development, or more apprenticeships, I
> could see it working. If we could have apprenticeships be standard,
> like internships/residence for medical doctors, I can see us coming
> close to this ideal.
>
I like the idea of apprenticeship, internship, etc. I think it might
matter more that someone learned from the right teacher than that they
can pass a simple test.
> But I doubt that is in scope for this scrum alliance proposal.
>
Certainly not, unfortunately.
>> Given a problem, can you work with a team to decompose the problem
>> into stories, write acceptance tests, test-drive the solution, and
>> integrate and deploy it. Supposing you could have a mini-iteration and
>> do all that as part of a course, then you have the problem of how to
>> accommodate all of the different languages and tool sets (Like trying
>> to train airline pilots and cessna pilots and helicopter pilots and
>> ship pilots and astronauts...)
>
> I like this in principle, and I suppose it could be done in a week.
> You might even combine it with something like 'givecamp' to create an
> environment with real problems, real customers, software that can be
> published and evaluated in public, etc.
>
Yes. Were you at the conference last month? Are you familiar with the
Agile Philanthropy (Live Aid Stage) stuff that Bob Payne and
Lithespeed are doing? http://www.codegreenlabs.com/
> Do you think you could convince industry to go for it? And if yes,
> what would it take?
>
I think that the industry would go for it if a couple big players got
behind it. I also think that, unfortunately, the Scrum Alliance is a
behemoth and whatever they chose to do will effect us for a long time
for better or for worse.
Adam Sroka
I think the model is inherently broken, and I don't think it suits our
purposes well enough to deserve the attention required to fix it. BTW,
the thing about dirty belts is just an urban myth. The Japanese have
been washing their clothes for several hundred years just like
everyone else. In fact, it works the other way around. The dyes that
were used to make black belts eventually fade to a mottled gray. This
is less true today since the technology to dye the belts has improved,
but some people still pride themselves on having old faded belts
(Means they have been a black belt for a long time and they are old
;-)
>> I doubt it. I like the mixed martial arts model better which is why I
>> brought it up. Your level/belt/rank/whatever is mostly determined by
>> your ability to compete successfully against people at that same
>> level. You only get a black belt in BJJ when you can roll with other
>> black belts.
>>
>> I'm not sure that applies to software either, but, at least insofar as
>> we should be examining applied skills and not just the ability to
>> follow directions and stick around (In which case we can certify my
>> dog.)
>
> Yeah, this is what I mean. So maybe you're sticking too much to the broken
> version of the model when thinking about the belt system.
Again, I think there is only the "broken version" and I don't think we
are likely to, nor should we attempt to, fix it.
Ted M. Young
problem [i.e., encourage the entire industry to prefer software
craftsmen]"? Is there another way to "generate" better software
developers? After interviewing over a hundred software developers the
past few years, I've found that very, very few of them know object-
oriented programming in even the most basic way, let alone
craftsmanship-level ability.
So really, what is the point of certifying folks who, by the very fact
that they're _interested_ in this certification, have already proven
themselves to be in the very top percent of all software developers?
Most developers simply _don't care_. When I ask job candidates how
they learn, improve their craft, etc., I get lots of blank stares, as
if to say "why would I need to do that?" And these are folks who have
been (supposedly) writing code for 10 years.
On the other hand, if some kind of testing somehow forces more
developers to care more about learning to become better developers,
then I'm all for it. Jumping to the certification of "agile
developers" skips so many rungs on the ladder (what about just a good
OO developer, or a developer that knows how to test their code) that
it just doesn't seem like it'd help all that much. I mean heck, we
_still_ have arguments about "what is good design", how are we
supposed to certify that?
;ted
--
Ted M. Young
Dev Mgr/Agile Coach
BillingCenter(r) Team
Guidewire Software
San Mateo, CA, USA
On Sep 11, 2:00 pm, Patrick Wilson-Welsh
Ron Jeffries
wrote:
> In any case, I dispute the usefulness of this metaphor entirely.
Yes. I think when we start talking about beating up people's wives,
we have gone rather far astray.
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
www.xprogramming.com/blog
Ron gave me a good suggestion once. -- Carlton (banshee858)
Adam Sroka
>
> Hello, Adam. On Saturday, September 12, 2009, at 5:18:16 PM, you
> wrote:
>
>> In any case, I dispute the usefulness of this metaphor entirely.
>
> Yes. I think when we start talking about beating up people's wives,
> we have gone rather far astray.
>
LOL. For the record, what I was asking was whether the certification
Matt's wife had would be of any use in predicting her ability to apply
those skills against highly skilled opponents in a competitive arena.
I wish no harm to either Matt or his wife. :-)
Ron Jeffries
wrote:
> And I love the idea that we could receive some type of "merit badges"
> for such that could generate excitement and encourage others to follow
> this behavior, which would in turn help raise the level of
> craftsmanship in software as more people got involved.
> But the question is - is this even within the scope of this
> discussion? :)
A really good outcome might well be something that would work so
much better than whatever the Scrum Alliance has in mind, and have
so much more impact on Scrum success, that they would prefer it.
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
www.xprogramming.com/blog
In programming, do, or undo. There is always try. --Yoda
Ron Jeffries
wrote:
> Like a few hundred others, I signed up here just now because Ron
> said it was a Good Thing. I saw this thread and figured it was
> one I should read first.
> So I have a question: What *is* the purpose of this list *now*?
> Is it to develop a certification program?
I think it is to understand and say what can be said about what a
good program would be to help Agile teams be successful, and if
possibly, to certify individuals and/or teams who are going to be
good at doing that.
> Is it do decide if such a program is a good idea?
That is certainly on my mind. I do not think it is possible to
/decide/, perhaps not even to come to consensus. I hope to come to
some clarity in my own mind.
> Is it to feed into an SA program?
The SA currently thinks they want a developer cert. They asked us to
work on it. Our work is probably not shaping up exactly as they
expected.
I am also aware of two or three other groups in the world who also
think they have been asked by the Scrum Alliance to do this. I do
not understand this fact, and hope to understand it better after
meeting with Jim next week.
> Is it to possibly lead to an independent program?
I can imagine that. Might even prefer it.
> Could it lead to a non-certification-based skill set?
We're definitely working on that. See the documents in the group.
> The name of the group suggests it's much broader than just
> helping the SA folks come up with a program that will be
> accepted. I'm interested in that broader context, so long
> as it's real and not just a label.
I'm as real as I know how to be. I think it possible that the SA
will take what we have and run with it. I think they are predisposed
to do so.
> I'm personally not interested in helping SA market a program,
> although I will defend your right to do so if that's what
> you're doing.
Our CSM course kicks ass whether it is a CSM course or how to do
Agile course. If we put together a development-focused course, asses
will run in terror from even more kicking.
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
www.xprogramming.com/blog
Steering is more important than speed,
in driving and in software development.
Charlie Poole
> > So I have a question: What *is* the purpose of this list *now*?
>
> > Is it to develop a certification program?
>
> I think it is to understand and say what can be said about
> what a good program would be to help Agile teams be
> successful, and if possibly, to certify individuals and/or
> teams who are going to be good at doing that.
> > Is it do decide if such a program is a good idea?
>
> That is certainly on my mind. I do not think it is possible
> to /decide/, perhaps not even to come to consensus. I hope to
> come to some clarity in my own mind.
not having a cert - at least in the circles I frequent.
> > Is it to feed into an SA program?
>
> The SA currently thinks they want a developer cert. They
> asked us to work on it. Our work is probably not shaping up
> exactly as they expected.
>
> I am also aware of two or three other groups in the world who
> also think they have been asked by the Scrum Alliance to do
> this. I do not understand this fact, and hope to understand
> it better after meeting with Jim next week.
allow anyone with the proper skills and background to put
together a course (and maybe a certification) that covers
all of what we see as needed.
My dislike of it as merely an SA program is simply part a
function of my dislike of any monopoly situation.
> > Is it to possibly lead to an independent program?
>
> I can imagine that. Might even prefer it.
> > Could it lead to a non-certification-based skill set?
>
> We're definitely working on that. See the documents in the group.
> > The name of the group suggests it's much broader than just
> helping the
> > SA folks come up with a program that will be accepted. I'm
> interested
> > in that broader context, so long as it's real and not just a label.
>
> I'm as real as I know how to be. I think it possible that the
> SA will take what we have and run with it. I think they are
> predisposed to do so.
>
> > I'm personally not interested in helping SA market a
> program, although
> > I will defend your right to do so if that's what you're doing.
>
> Our CSM course kicks ass whether it is a CSM course or how to
> do Agile course. If we put together a development-focused
> course, asses will run in terror from even more kicking.
Scrum - and how to develop within a Scrum project - but I avoid
trying to compete with the official CSM classes. I would really
dislike seeing SA get a lock on - for example - TDD training
due to having a "cert" of some kind.
This is of course self-interest on my part, but it's also a
concern that lack of competition is not good for any of us.
Thanks - you answered all my questions.
Charlie
Charlie
Peter Stevens
What is the relationship between a PPL and a programmers
certification?
One: It is possible to demonstrate skill. A written test however is
not a demonstration of skill. It is a confirmation of basic knowledge.
You know enough that it's work risking the examiner's time
Two: Demonstration of skill requires personal interaction. For a
pilot, the demonstration of skill is an oral and practical test, one
on one with a trusted examiner, covering a defined range of topics.
So how would this apply to a CSD (or even CSM)? For example:
1. An applicant takes X hours of instruction from a trusted source
(let's ignore the question of what qualities as a trusted source)
covering a defined curriculum
2. An applicant applies these principles & practices to a development
project, which produces a running, tested and demonstratable
application
3. An applicant takes an oral exam from a trusted examiner in which
they discuss the project, the values & principles of agile, based on
defined guidelines for the exam.
4. The applicant spends an hour pairing with the trusted examiner in
an actual development context.
A review similar to steps 3 and 4 could be required every Y years to
maintain the qualification.
Cheers,
Peter
On Sep 12, 8:26 pm, Ted Young <tedyo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> I like the 9 questions that you ask at the end, but I don't see how the
> Pilot's Licensing could relate to software development skills.
>
> It's easy to determine whether a pilot has had 3 take-offs and landings.
> Pilots have log books. Pilots spend time in simulators to both learn and be
> evaluated.
>
> So, by landing a plane, you've proved you can do it. How do we do that for
> software development in a meaningful way? What's the equivalent of landing a
> plane? What's the equivalent of spending time in a simulator?
>
> I'm not seeing the value in using the Pilot's license as a basis for
> determining how we certify software development skills.
>
> ;ted
>
mheusser
and now we are far afield ...
--heusser
Ted Young
Phrased that way, I think I agree more, though there's a bit of a gulf between flying and landing a plane (which is mostly objective in terms of success, no?), and completing a software application, that can take either hours, days, or even weeks, depending on the complexity and is somewhat subjective in terms of success (what defines success?). I also don't believe that an hour of pairing is sufficient, though maybe a day is.
I'm curious how much money it costs per year for a pilot to both become certified and to remain so.
All that aside, it's a lot of time and effort -- both for the applicant and the examiner -- to do any of this. If it's not required by law or other authority, why would anyone want to go through it?
;ted