freebsd-chat Digest, Vol 68, Issue 2
freebsd-ch...@freebsd.org
freebs...@freebsd.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
freebsd-ch...@freebsd.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
freebsd-c...@freebsd.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of freebsd-chat digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux Network
Administrator) (b...@Illinois.DynDNS.Org)
2. Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux Network
Administrator) (Chris)
3. Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux Network
Administrator) (Brad Knowles)
4. Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux Network
Administrator) (Daniel M. Kurry)
5. Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux NetworkAdministrator)
(Brandon Joseph Adams)
6. Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux NetworkAdministrator)
(Brad Knowles)
7. Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux Network
Administrator) (Marc Ramirez)
8. freebsd and dragonfly bsd (Chris Conn)
9. Re: freebsd and dragonfly bsd (Dan Langille)
10. Re: freebsd and dragonfly bsd (Vijay Kaul)
11. Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux Network
Administrator) (Jeremy C. Reed)
12. Re: freebsd and dragonfly bsd (Josh Ockert)
13. Re: freebsd and dragonfly bsd (Dan Langille)
14. Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux Network
Administrator) (Paul Robinson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 10:21:19 -0000 (GMT)
From: b...@Illinois.DynDNS.Org
Subject: Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux Network
Administrator)
To: "Jeremy C. Reed" <re...@reedmedia.net>
Cc: "freebs...@freebsd.org" <ch...@freebsd.org>
Message-ID:
<32837.192.168.1.238...@Illinois.DynDNS.Org>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
> As for learning via reading: that is fine for many -- including myself.
> But many students need the extra push by actually attending a structured,
> hands-on class. Also classes, even running at a slow pace, can cover a
> lot more than a student trying to self-teach themselves.
I disagree here. I'm a self-taught student and I doubt any classes would
have taught me as much as installing the system and using it day to day
for a couple months. I eventually set up a FreeBSD and my family and I
rely on it for just about all computer functions.
Hands-on is great, but classes are not needed.
Brandon Adams
>
> Jeremy C. Reed
>
> BSD News, BSD tutorials, BSD links
> http://www.bsdnewsletter.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebs...@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-jobs
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-jobs...@freebsd.org"
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 11:08:08 -0500
From: Chris <rac...@makeworld.com>
Subject: Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux Network
Administrator)
To: freebs...@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <200407051108...@makeworld.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
On Monday 05 July 2004 05:21 am, b...@Illinois.DynDNS.Org wrote:
> > As for learning via reading: that is fine for many -- including myself.
> > But many students need the extra push by actually attending a structured,
> > hands-on class. Also classes, even running at a slow pace, can cover a
> > lot more than a student trying to self-teach themselves.
>
> I disagree here. I'm a self-taught student and I doubt any classes would
> have taught me as much as installing the system and using it day to day
> for a couple months. I eventually set up a FreeBSD and my family and I
> rely on it for just about all computer functions.
>
> Hands-on is great, but classes are not needed.
>
> Brandon Adams
I agree 100% here. Nothing, I mean nothing can prepare you for real-life then
setting up your own servers, then breaking them every way you can think of
just to fix the issues.
You can't learn that in a classroom.
--
Best regards,
Chris
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous
content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
ClamAV virus dat updated: Mon Jul 5 2004 at 03:02:56
daily.cvd updated (version: 387, sigs: 1362, f-level: 2, builder: diego)
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 18:17:24 +0200
From: Brad Knowles <brad.k...@skynet.be>
Subject: Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux Network
Administrator)
To: rac...@makeworld.com
Cc: freebs...@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <p06002012bd0f2f000232@[10.0.1.3]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
At 11:08 AM -0500 2004-07-05, Chris wrote:
> I agree 100% here. Nothing, I mean nothing can prepare you for real-life then
> setting up your own servers, then breaking them every way you can think of
> just to fix the issues.
>
> You can't learn that in a classroom.
Actually, the problem here is that you, as students, cannot
possibly think of all the possible ways to break the machines in
question. The instructors can't either, but they'll be able to think
of a lot more of the sorts of things that are frequently found in
production systems.
This is a situation where you need someone who is more
experienced than you are to break the systems, and then let you try
to fix them. Moreover, you should have a limited amount of time to
try to fix them. This is something you are highly unlikely to be
able to simulate outside of a laboratory environment that is
associated with classes being taught.
--
Brad Knowles, <brad.k...@skynet.be>
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755
SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 11:19:49 -0500
From: "Daniel M. Kurry" <g...@over-yonder.net>
Subject: Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux Network
Administrator)
To: Chris <rac...@makeworld.com>
Cc: freebs...@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20040705161...@over-yonder.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Chris said something like:
> I agree 100% here. Nothing, I mean nothing can prepare you for real-life then
> setting up your own servers, then breaking them every way you can think of
> just to fix the issues.
>
> You can't learn that in a classroom.
So, you couldn't, like, have a class where you fix a broken server?
A class need not revolve around a broken textbook or the rote memorizing
of material.
Dan
> --
> Best regards,
> Chris
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 10:45:43 -0000 (GMT)
From: "Brandon Joseph Adams" <b...@illinois.dyndns.org>
Subject: Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux NetworkAdministrator)
To: "Brad Knowles" <brad.k...@skynet.be>
Cc: freebs...@freebsd.org
Message-ID:
<32866.192.168.1.238...@Illinois.DynDNS.Org>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
> At 11:08 AM -0500 2004-07-05, Chris wrote:
>
>> I agree 100% here. Nothing, I mean nothing can prepare you for
>> real-life then
>> setting up your own servers, then breaking them every way you can think
>> of
>> just to fix the issues.
>>
>> You can't learn that in a classroom.
>
> Actually, the problem here is that you, as students, cannot
> possibly think of all the possible ways to break the machines in
> question. The instructors can't either, but they'll be able to think
> of a lot more of the sorts of things that are frequently found in
> production systems.
>
> This is a situation where you need someone who is more
> experienced than you are to break the systems, and then let you try
> to fix them. Moreover, you should have a limited amount of time to
> try to fix them. This is something you are highly unlikely to be
> able to simulate outside of a laboratory environment that is
> associated with classes being taught.
>From experience, setting a FreeBSD box on the internet without any clue as
to what was going on, there are more than enough people willing to break
your box for you that'll leave you with a mess to clean up. I'm not trying
to be funny, this is the truth.
>
> --
> Brad Knowles, <brad.k...@skynet.be>
>
Brandon Joseph Adams
b...@illinois.dyndns.org
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 19:01:17 +0200
From: Brad Knowles <brad.k...@skynet.be>
Subject: Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux NetworkAdministrator)
To: "Brandon Joseph Adams" <b...@illinois.dyndns.org>
Cc: Brad Knowles <brad.k...@skynet.be>
Message-ID: <p06002014bd0f396671f1@[10.0.1.3]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
At 10:45 AM +0000 2004-07-05, Brandon Joseph Adams wrote:
> From experience, setting a FreeBSD box on the internet without any clue as
> to what was going on, there are more than enough people willing to break
> your box for you that'll leave you with a mess to clean up. I'm not trying
> to be funny, this is the truth.
That's a different class of problem. As a system admin, you're
going to be responsible for fixing not only those very few systems
which have been compromised by external attackers, but also the > 90%
break-ins which have come from inside personnel exceeding their
authorized level of access, as well as the machines which have been
munged because you (or one of your co-workers) fat-fingered something.
Just leaving an open box on the 'net and trying to fix whatever
comes up is a very poor way to try to learn about all those other
classes of problems.
--
Brad Knowles, <brad.k...@skynet.be>
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755
SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 13:19:34 -0400
From: Marc Ramirez <marc.r...@bluecirclesoft.com>
Subject: Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux Network
Administrator)
To: freebs...@freebsd.org, rac...@makeworld.com
Message-ID: <200407051319.42...@bluecirclesoft.com>
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 05 July 2004 12:08 pm, Chris wrote:
> On Monday 05 July 2004 05:21 am, b...@Illinois.DynDNS.Org wrote:
> > > As for learning via reading: that is fine for many -- including myself.
> > > But many students need the extra push by actually attending a
> > > structured, hands-on class. Also classes, even running at a slow pace,
> > > can cover a lot more than a student trying to self-teach themselves.
> >
> > I disagree here. I'm a self-taught student and I doubt any classes would
> > have taught me as much as installing the system and using it day to day
> > for a couple months. I eventually set up a FreeBSD and my family and I
> > rely on it for just about all computer functions.
> >
> > Hands-on is great, but classes are not needed.
> >
> > Brandon Adams
>
> I agree 100% here. Nothing, I mean nothing can prepare you for real-life
> then setting up your own servers, then breaking them every way you can
> think of just to fix the issues.
>
> You can't learn that in a classroom.
Classrooms are not a substitute for experience.
However, don't forget the original author's point that _for many students_
they need the class. And, yes, they don't strictly _need_ the class, but
there are a large variety of reasons that they need someone to be there with
them while learning. I would venture that with the historical preponderance
of trade guilds, master/apprentice relationships, centers of education, etc.,
that the a large part of the population falls into this category.
Without that, you will have an elitist club whose members just happen to have
already acquired the ability to understand the basic concepts.
- --
Marc Ramirez
Blue Circle Software Corporation
513-688-1070 (main)
513-382-1270 (direct)
http://www.bluecirclesoft.com
http://www.mrami.com (personal)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFA6Y2sg1EgpGw750IRAj8nAKCbKHuKzDSe3ZR9NhEhObs3nIYE2wCfT5YH
IAElrmcnCk90ou74a8M/eGE=
=r8AV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 10:36:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chris Conn <cmc4slac...@yahoo.com>
Subject: freebsd and dragonfly bsd
To: freebs...@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <2004070517360...@web80803.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hi, I've been a FreeBSD user for a while,
am currently running 4.8, haven't tried
version 5 yet. I haven't been reading the
mailing lists or web sites much until now.
I saw the web page for Dragonfly BSD and
it implies that there were design differences
with version 5 that led to this new version
but I don't really have a feel for what the
differences are, can somebody tell me about
this change? Or are there political issues
that led to this?
=====
Christopher Mark Conn
http://storm.cadcam.iupui.edu/~cmcgoat
Austin, Texas, USA
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2004 13:39:20 -0400
From: "Dan Langille" <d...@langille.org>
Subject: Re: freebsd and dragonfly bsd
To: Chris Conn <cmc4slac...@yahoo.com>
Cc: freebs...@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <40E95A08.1692.D89B9D62@localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
On 5 Jul 2004 at 10:36, Chris Conn wrote:
> Hi, I've been a FreeBSD user for a while,
> am currently running 4.8, haven't tried
> version 5 yet. I haven't been reading the
> mailing lists or web sites much until now.
>
> I saw the web page for Dragonfly BSD and
> it implies that there were design differences
> with version 5 that led to this new version
> but I don't really have a feel for what the
> differences are, can somebody tell me about
> this change? Or are there political issues
> that led to this?
I would think that the Dragonfly BSD lists would be the better place
to ask about Dragonfly BSD...
--
Dan Langille : http://www.langille.org/
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2004 13:39:54 -0500
From: "Vijay Kaul" <vk...@ma.rr.com>
Subject: Re: freebsd and dragonfly bsd
To: "Dan Langille" <d...@langille.org>, "Chris Conn"
<cmc4slac...@yahoo.com>
Cc: freebs...@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <opsaogss...@gogobera.ma.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes;
charset=iso-8859-15
On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 13:39:20 -0400, Dan Langille <d...@langille.org> wrote:
> On 5 Jul 2004 at 10:36, Chris Conn wrote:
>
>> Hi, I've been a FreeBSD user for a while,
>> am currently running 4.8, haven't tried
>> version 5 yet. I haven't been reading the
>> mailing lists or web sites much until now.
>>
>> I saw the web page for Dragonfly BSD and
>> it implies that there were design differences
>> with version 5 that led to this new version
>> but I don't really have a feel for what the
>> differences are, can somebody tell me about
>> this change? Or are there political issues
>> that led to this?
>
> I would think that the Dragonfly BSD lists would be the better place
> to ask about Dragonfly BSD...
Having visited the DFly site and looked for info myself, I've found enough
reasons why going the way DFly has is a worth while idea. However, knowing
that both the DFly and FBSD people are skilled and experienced coders, I'm
sure that *both* sides have their ups and downs. For getting FBSD's side
of the story, I figure the FBSD lists would actually be a better place to
ask.
The two reasons I hesitate to ask:
1) major decisions like the branching of code into an entirely seperate
(okay, as seperate as two BSDs get) project is a big decision. Many people
will have taken many stances on the decisions that were made. Some of
these people may be very good at provoking others of these people. I'm new
here: I don't know. I do not want to dredge up old arguments.
2) I'm not sure where it would be appropriate to ask. A lot of the
differences aren't so much conceptual as technical. So I feel like "chat"
might be a bit off topic. However, hackers and current and stable and such
don't feel right either.
Anyhow, if anyone could maybe point to a "the FBSD team stance on DFly's
SMP threading model," or some such resource, give a consice relatively
unbiased recap of what happened, and/or answer the question in some other
way, please do! I'm sure there are more of us who are very curious to know.
(Also, if this should be posted elsewhere, please move the discussion
there. Thanks.)
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 11:58:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Jeremy C. Reed" <re...@reedmedia.net>
Subject: Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux Network
Administrator)
To: b...@Illinois.DynDNS.Org
Cc: "freebs...@freebsd.org" <ch...@freebsd.org>
Message-ID:
<Pine.LNX.4.43.04070...@pilchuck.reedmedia.net>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Mon, 5 Jul 2004 b...@Illinois.DynDNS.Org wrote:
> > As for learning via reading: that is fine for many -- including myself.
> > But many students need the extra push by actually attending a structured,
> > hands-on class. Also classes, even running at a slow pace, can cover a
> > lot more than a student trying to self-teach themselves.
>
> I disagree here. I'm a self-taught student and I doubt any classes would
> have taught me as much as installing the system and using it day to day
> for a couple months. I eventually set up a FreeBSD and my family and I
> rely on it for just about all computer functions.
>
> Hands-on is great, but classes are not needed.
Many of my students have limited time and limited interest to learn
FreeBSD on their own. But their employers are interested for them to take
multiple days of hands-on training.
Also, learning over a "couple months" is too slow versus a class that can
teach many skills with real experiences in a few days.
And as others mentioned, trying to learn on your own may not provide with
the real-world experiences that a qualified instructor can provide.
An example of something we do in some of our classes is teach basics of
BIND and Apache, and then the students apply the skills to configure
named.conf, create their own zone file(s) and then setup httpd.conf for
virtual hosting, for some real hands-on experiences.
Often I have students that have years of Unix experience, even back to the
1980's, who have told me many times: "I didn't know you could do it that
way", "I wish I knew that before", "That is something I had difficulty
learning on my own", "I have wanted to learn that for a long time", etc.
Yes, the students could have learned in an alternative way, but sometimes
paying money encourages you to learn differently.
Jeremy C. Reed
open source, Unix, *BSD, Linux training
http://www.pugetsoundtechnology.com/
p.s. Notice the To: line. It says "jobs" but the address is chat. Funny.
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2004 16:10:28 -0500
From: Josh Ockert <tors...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: freebsd and dragonfly bsd
To: freebs...@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <126eac4804070...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
I like how whenever there's a schism between two parties, it's always
the minority that is supposed to play apologetics and explain what the
differing philosophies are.
IMO, someone looking to compare between two different camps is valid
in asking either or both camps about what makes them unique.
On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 13:39:20 -0400, Dan Langille <d...@langille.org> wrote:
> On 5 Jul 2004 at 10:36, Chris Conn wrote:
>
> > Hi, I've been a FreeBSD user for a while,
> > am currently running 4.8, haven't tried
> > version 5 yet. I haven't been reading the
> > mailing lists or web sites much until now.
> >
> > I saw the web page for Dragonfly BSD and
> > it implies that there were design differences
> > with version 5 that led to this new version
> > but I don't really have a feel for what the
> > differences are, can somebody tell me about
> > this change? Or are there political issues
> > that led to this?
>
> I would think that the Dragonfly BSD lists would be the better place
> to ask about Dragonfly BSD...
> --
> Dan Langille : http://www.langille.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebs...@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat...@freebsd.org"
>
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2004 20:18:07 -0400
From: "Dan Langille" <d...@langille.org>
Subject: Re: freebsd and dragonfly bsd
To: Josh Ockert <tors...@gmail.com>
Cc: freebs...@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <40E9B77F.18387.DA08BB23@localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
On 5 Jul 2004 at 16:10, Josh Ockert wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 13:39:20 -0400, Dan Langille <d...@langille.org> wrote:
> > On 5 Jul 2004 at 10:36, Chris Conn wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, I've been a FreeBSD user for a while,
> > > am currently running 4.8, haven't tried
> > > version 5 yet. I haven't been reading the
> > > mailing lists or web sites much until now.
> > >
> > > I saw the web page for Dragonfly BSD and
> > > it implies that there were design differences
> > > with version 5 that led to this new version
> > > but I don't really have a feel for what the
> > > differences are, can somebody tell me about
> > > this change? Or are there political issues
> > > that led to this?
> >
> > I would think that the Dragonfly BSD lists would be the better place
> > to ask about Dragonfly BSD...
> I like how whenever there's a schism between two parties, it's always
> the minority that is supposed to play apologetics and explain what the
> differing philosophies are.
That is not that was asked. We were asked to explain why Dragonfly
BSD was created. Not about the FreeBSD philosophy.
> IMO, someone looking to compare between two different camps is valid
> in asking either or both camps about what makes them unique.
Asking us about FreeBSD is quite valid. But that's not what was
asked.
--
Dan Langille : http://www.langille.org/
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 08:52:38 +0100
From: Paul Robinson <pa...@iconoplex.co.uk>
Subject: Re: training (was Resourceful BSD/Linux Network
Administrator)
To: "Jeremy C. Reed" <re...@reedmedia.net>
Cc: "freebs...@freebsd.org" <ch...@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20040706075...@iconoplex.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I should warn you that even for me, this is a long e-mail. some of you
should just hit 'D' now - this is not for the easily bored. :-)
On Mon, Jul 05, 2004 at 11:58:50AM -0700, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> Many of my students have limited time and limited interest to learn
> FreeBSD on their own. But their employers are interested for them to take
> multiple days of hands-on training.
No, not always.
> Also, learning over a "couple months" is too slow versus a class that can
> teach many skills with real experiences in a few days.
You're making a mistake here. You're making a lot of assumptions that even
the worst academics threw out with the bathwater a decade ago. I know you're
not an academic, so it's not your fault. I'll try and help your mind get
through this, but this might be a bit terse.
I'll say this again for clarity before I go on - this is my job, I do it for
a living, I work on a GBP 3.3 million publically-funded project in a
University to deliver learning to those working in the IT industry in the
North West of the UK, I've been working with a research group on this for
two years.... if this was a legal discussion, we'd all be "IANAL", but in
this context, I *am* an expert. For the last 12 months I have lived and
breathed pedagogical analysis, accreditation frameworks, learning objects,
etc., etc...
Right then, now that's out of the way,
Most are in general agreement that JIT (Just In Time) Work-based learning is
what most people working in our industry do. That means you're sat at your
desk, you have a problem, you don't know how to solve it, you go out and try
and find out how to do it. With OSS this typically involves google, some
mailing list archives and perhaps a mail to a list where you think you might
get some help. You do not have the time to phone up a training company and
spend 4 days in a classroom next month at a cost of several hundred quid,
because you need the knowledge *now*.
There are two problems here:
1. The "student" is always learning "just enough" to "get by" and so his
employer suffers, as maybe half the time the employee is learning rather
than doing.
2. It does not allow for accreditation/certification as it's unstructured.
So, a scheme was dreamt up allowing for evidence-based accreditation. This
would mean that you could show me a webserver you setup as evidence you know
how to setup a webserver. I could ask you to produe a httpd.conf that allows
for multiple virtual hosts to be quickly created, and you provide your
evidence which I can then assess within the context of an accreditation
framework.
This could blend with a traditional framework where you are expected to take
some form of examination, or in fact be completly replaced by it if you're
just starting out in the industry, to help learners gain certifications. It
has the advantage that it takes into account existing knowledge and
experience whilst still allowing a clear pathway through for those who have
no work-based experience. We are assessing knowledge after all, not
experience. All accreditations do, with the possible exception of those that
are so hard, the only way you can pass is with experience (e.g. CCIE)
So, a student could go out, get the accreditation and an employer would have
a clear indication of an employee's competencies, and the employee would not
be constantly scrabbling for knowledge - they would have all the knowledge
needed to do a particular job. They would still be able to do JIT learning
if needed, but on providing evidence of that learning, they would be able to
make the time spent on it fit into "accredited study". Neat, huh?
But this doesn't really work either. The biggest problems are:
1. The accreditation frameworks don't exist, and this is partly because job
roles are ill-defined within the industry (what is a "Sysadmin"? what fits
in one company, doesn't in another) and can never be well-defined enough to
make such a framework easy to produce.
2. You need to structure learning materials to make it easier to fit a
learner's knowledge against an accreditation framework - they need to know
what they're actually being asked to learn, and therefore you need to know
what information a person needs to do their job.
3. The learning content is itself currently VERY scarce other than through
those ad-hoc channels discussed above, and there is no method to capture
tacit knowledge within a piece of structured learning content. Where it does
exist, it is typically out of date and of a poor quality, or incredibly
expensive.
So, the whole point of what I've been trying to say, is that via
collaborative working, a set of LOs (Learning Objects) can be built up based
on knowledge held by those experts in particular fields that can be mapped
against an accreditation framework. This would be able to accomodate tacit
knowledge, could be quickly built up to take into account emerging trends,
etc. and yet still act as a framework for instructor-led, on-line or other
forms of learning.
If you want a certification to actually hold water with employers, you can't
just say "let's get people to fix a broken server". It is more complicated
than that. Fixing a server shows a competency, but a competency is only one
part of what needs to be tested for a certification to stand up.
Your short term solution provides a sufficient enough answer to address
immediate structured training needs. It does not, however, fit into a
long-term plan to provide accredited learning and structured certifications
that can be recognised internationally. Of course, that's not your current
aim, which is why you can live happily doing what you're doing. But really,
now we're talking about moving into a different realm, you're not going to
be able to map what you're doing across easily as "the way to do it". You
need to think outside the box a little. :-)
I'm afraid that quite frankly, I don't know how to convince you otherwise
without you going out, spending a lot of time and effort building up what
you want to do and then for you to wonder why it doesn't get the recognition
you feel it deserves. I could send you a dozen books on the matter, but
they're not light reading material, and I'm not paying the postage. :-)
What I will do though, is take these notes made here, merge them into the
open training stuff up on Vagueware, and see if that begins to make any
sense. If it doesn't, no worries - the fault is with me, and I haven't
explained what all this means properly. If it does, then maybe we can start
to make something happen.
I'm not saying my suggestion is perfect, but it stands up to academic
scrutiny more than anything else discussed so far, so let's start with that
and let it evolve a little and see where it goes?
As all this lot will go into a wiki, you can edit it to your heart's content
anyway, or even delete it. :-)
> And as others mentioned, trying to learn on your own may not provide with
> the real-world experiences that a qualified instructor can provide.
Define "qualified" instructor. You're talking about instructor-led training,
which seems an odd segregation to make in the age of blended learning.
Ideally, you need a mixture of instructor-led, workshop, textbook, tutorial,
etc. and these would ideally be a mixture of on-line, classroom-based,
whatever. It is rather naive to say that "instructor-led training is best",
as people on this thread have already said - different people need to learn
in different ways.
> Yes, the students could have learned in an alternative way, but sometimes
> paying money encourages you to learn differently.
The level of absorbtion is not governed by how much money has been spent. In
some countries, higher education is still free you know. :-)
--
Paul Robinson
http://www.iconoplex.co.uk/
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
freebs...@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat...@freebsd.org"
End of freebsd-chat Digest, Vol 68, Issue 2
*******************************************