Certification or College degrees?

IMO:

Certifications are a waste of time. You'd be better off
obtaining a Computer Science degree and focusing on the
core technologies.

Why would you devote your career to learning a vendor's
command line or IOS?

Cisco has done an excellent job @ brainwashing the IT
community. The have (unfortunately) set the standard for
"Network Engineers".

What do you think is more respected, a masters degree in
Networking Engineering or a CCIE. In most
circles it would be the latter.

Cisco's certification program has effected the entire IT
community. Their CCIE's are required to recertify every few
years, thus forcing them to stay true to the Cisco lifestyle.

I've met some CCIE's who don't know any programming languages
or any experience with Unix. It's clear that they are one
dimensional and unfocused.

Why study the same thing over and over? Do you really have X
amount of years experience, or do you have 1 years experience
X times?

Think about it. If you have been in the field for over 5
years and someone new to the industry by way of certification
can handle your work load, that is a serious problem.

If anything certs should be used as a stepping stone or
advancement to new technologies or areas.

Then again, the question of CERTS vs. DEGREES might apply
differently to someone without any experience. I guess it
really depends on what your looking for.

One of my arguments is that this doesn't exist but at a FEW schools
around the world and only at the MS level. I've been looking for a
network engineering program because personally I don't see myself being
required to design a processor, as long as I know how it behaves and
operates. Sure some believe its required to know how to build a processor and I think its really cool
(Yes I do know) but to some this is not important because they will
never be required to build one. This would be the perfect curriculum. I know Valdis is from VT, so I hope he's listening. Why
couldn't we as a networking community sit down and come up with a degree
program that goes from BS to PhD? Sure it can touch on basic programming
and basic processor design, but it would be more heavily weighted towards
utilizing technologies on the market and creating solutions to the common
programs. It could be a mix between the CCIE, Net+, etc. Because I know
my Comp Engineering program doesn't touch on anything related at all to
networking, and never even mentions the idea of security. So why not
create a focused area for this?

- Andrew

I see ucsd extension offers a communication engineering cert, which altho
a cert is not vendor specific. Seems to deal with typical hi level EE
stuff, and offers a shot to get into their masters program.

  Bri

Exactly! It is high level EE stuff..... That's not the same thing. It's
the engineering method of making a round peg fit in a triangular hole.

Andrew

Hi all,

   I've read this thread with quite a bit of interest, I must admit. I
must say that after reading it all, I see alot of ... misguided
perceptions.

   Certifications, of any kind, be it university degrees, or other
generic certifications, or even the product specific ones, are just a way
to ascertain material knowledge. Nothing, nothing more. By no means are
they any good at ascertaining the persons ability to implement knowledge
(no matter what Cisco says about its hands on lab test). Like any other
program, they are built around a specific structure. That doesn't predict
the ability of a person to implement knowledge in new situations, adapt it
to his/her needs, and find a solution to a new problem.

   If the original question that started this thread meant to ask which is
better for getting a job, then I don't know, it depends on who's hiring.
Ideally though, a persons resume is built upon a few factors. You have the
core knowledge, which is - as some put it here - just data you accumulate.
Unless you practice with it, it stays fresh in your mind for a few months
tops, and then fades (remember those university mid terms ?).

   For knowledge to be useful, one needs to apply it. Thus, a resume
should mainly point out, apart from the "what you read from books" part,
and what toys you played with (be it routers, servers, and so on) how you
have implemented that knowledge, and where. This is, the "experience"
part. This includes references from former employers, whom you can call, and
other pertinent stuff. One of the qualities I look for most in people, is
the ability to learn and adapt, self motivation and independence. Of
course there are other personality issues taken into consideration, but
this is off topic.

   For the degree vs. certification bit, I'd say I treat them with the
same suspicion. The ability to learn from books and take tests is not
really a good predictor of a successful network engineer, or a successful
anything for that matter. IT environment tends to be very flexible and
fast paced. Technologies and products change at a fast pace, and at this
point, only the ability to learn and adapt, and I mean, learn by yourself,
not have me push you from behind, this predicts, IMHO, much better, the
chance of being able to hire someone that will last more than a short
while.

    Learning never stops. It's a never ending process, and that's the
beauty of it. Patting yourself on the back while looking at your resume,
where you see that you have X Y and Z diplomas will do no one any good. I
have nothing against college degrees, or vendor based (or independant
based) certifications. People should learn, and for all I care, as much as
they can. What matters, in the end, is their ability to implement what
they have learned.

    So, experience and abilities based on character and intelect are the
most important job ingredients you'll ever have. That doesn't mean
knowledge is not important. The IT business is not medicine, or engineering
of structures. The reason those require certifications up front is because
they deal with human lives. And yet, most doctors I know are incompetent,
despite the fact they passed their exams, and have their doctors license.

my 2 cents,

--Ariel

In a message written on Wed, May 22, 2002 at 06:37:35PM -0400, Nigel Clarke wrote:

Why would you devote your career to learning a vendor's
command line or IOS?

Selling your soul to a vendor is not always a bad decision. It
happens in all industries as well. If the vendor is popular, there
will always be people willing to pay for detailed experience with
that vendor, or for esoteric knowledge about that vendor.

Cisco has done an excellent job @ brainwashing the IT
community. The have (unfortunately) set the standard for
"Network Engineers".

I'm biased, see .sig, but having been through the process, and seen
what other vendors (eg, Microsoft, Novell) do with their programs
I do believe that Cisco wants their certifications to mean something.
No, that doesn't mean everyone who is certified is an expert. It
does mean the odds that someone with a Cisco certification knows
something are probably an order of magnitude better than a Microsoft
certified person.

What do you think is more respected, a masters degree in
Networking Engineering or a CCIE. In most
circles it would be the latter.

What I really want to address is that you don't get something like
a CCIE for the "respect". Believe me, I don't get any for having
it. When I got it, I was a consultant. The reality was if I had
a CCIE my employer could bill me at a significantly higher rate,
some of which they passed on to me. Why did people pay these rates?
The answer was simple, they had better odds of getting someone
good. These people would go through 4-5 "Network Engineers", get
frustrated because they really and truly didn't know anything,
they would then pay for a CCIE and, more often than not, be happy.

I really don't think Cisco is better or worse than other industries.
Are all ASE Certified Master Mechanics people you want working on
your car? No. Are there some non-certified mechanics who could
run circles around the certified ones? Of course. That said, your
odds are much better that your car will run again if you have a
certified mechanic.

Many have said business is simply risk management, and certifications
are a way of managing that risk.

Thus spake "Nigel Clarke" <nigel@forever-networks.com>

Certifications are a waste of time. You'd be better off
obtaining a Computer Science degree and focusing on the
core technologies.

If you're looking to write software, sure. A CompSci degree won't help you
in the slightest at operating networks.

Why would you devote your career to learning a vendor's
command line or IOS?

You don't. You devote your career to learning networking. IOS is a base
skill which is necessary (today) to utilize that knowledge and, more
importantly, get a job.

A person with lots of knowledge and no skills is a liberal arts major, not
an engineer.

Cisco has done an excellent job @ brainwashing the IT
community. The have (unfortunately) set the standard for
"Network Engineers".

What do you think is more respected, a masters degree in
Networking Engineering or a CCIE. In most
circles it would be the latter.

In the academic community, the former. In the professional community, the
latter.

Academic respect doesn't pay the bills.

Cisco's certification program has effected the entire IT
community. Their CCIE's are required to recertify every few
years, thus forcing them to stay true to the Cisco lifestyle.

No, they're required to stay knowledgeable with current technical advances
in the field. That's hardly unreasonable.

I've met some CCIE's who don't know any programming
languages or any experience with Unix. It's clear that they
are one dimensional and unfocused.

Unfocused? People with a single skill set are usually considered "highly
focused". Now, I find that folks with Unix experience tend to make better
networkers, but it's hardly a required skill.

Why study the same thing over and over? Do you really have X
amount of years experience, or do you have 1 years experience
X times?

Think about it. If you have been in the field for over 5
years and someone new to the industry by way of certification
can handle your work load, that is a serious problem.

That's not a problem with the certification; that's a problem with your lack
of initiative. I don't think I've ever done the same thing for five months,
much less five years.

Then again, the question of CERTS vs. DEGREES might apply
differently to someone without any experience. I guess it
really depends on what your looking for.

Degrees are, in essence, a certificate that you are capable of learning
things by rote and regurgitating them later, possibly applying a small
amount of thought (but not too much). In most industries, that's a highly
valuable thing to know, and businesses hire college grads with the
assumption they'll spend the first year doing little but training them to do
useful work.

The IT industry does not have the patience or luxury of hiring a completely
cluess college grad, sending them to the dozens of required classes, giving
them a mentor to help them with their first year of work, etc. People want
someone who can solve the problem today, period. Certifications are a crude
but often effective means for non-technical people to determine if technical
people meet their needs.

S

Nigel,

I think you are confusing software engineers with network engineers. As a rule of thumb, software / applications writers rarely understand how networks really work, in the same way that network engineers rarely understand how software / applications really work.

IMHO, there is no mandatory reason a network engineer has to know a programming language, in the same way there's no mandatory reason that a top software engineer has to be able to configure a Cisco router. People who grok both worlds are critical for companies that are writing software that touches networks, and in general such people are versatile and valuable. But the real trick is getting a team of all three types to complement each other, not hiring a single skill / mindset.

You also seem not to like Cisco for some reason. Perhaps this is why you have never looked at the curriculum for CCIE. It does require you to know the Cisco CLI, but that is to show you can correctly implement the solutions you devise -- a very practical consideration for someone purporting to be a network engineer. Knowing how to devise those solutions is the major focus of CCIE, not memorizing the Cisco CLI. You could equally translate the learned knowledge to, say, Juniper CLI. Finally, trying to paint re-certification in a very fast-moving industry as some kind of conspiracy is a real stretch.

The title of this thread is part of the problem: "certification or degrees", as if they are mutually exclusive.

Cheers,

Mathew

Computer science does enforce critical thinking skills, which are a very
necessary part of any successful engineer's toolbox.

  Bri

If that is what you or anyone else got from obtaining a degree then
you were shortchanged and are probably (understandably) bitter. But
you have noone to blame but yourself either. Every consumer should
count their change.

Your description of learning things by rote and regurgitation is the
method practiced by so many folks following your employer's
certification system. That is why the system and the certified
individuals are looked down upon so often. Anyone that received a
cert this way was similarly shortchanged.

Maybe individuals should think of degrees and certifications as tools
used for the purpose of advancing through life/world/career. They are
certainly not the only tools. You can have replacements or
alternatives. You can (and should) supplement your toolset at
different points in your life. Choose your tools carefully, use the
right one(s) at the apropos time and good luck in life and career. I
personally would want to accumulate as many tools as possible to give
me a wide array of knowledge and options to address any particular
problem/circumstance.

Regards,
Sharif

If that is what you or anyone else got from obtaining a degree then
you were shortchanged and are probably (understandably) bitter. But
you have noone to blame but yourself either. Every consumer should
count their change.

Your description of learning things by rote and regurgitation is the
method practiced by so many folks following your employer's
certification system. That is why the system and the certified
individuals are looked down upon so often. Anyone that received a
cert this way was similarly shortchanged.

Maybe individuals should think of degrees and certifications as tools
used for the purpose of advancing through life/world/career. They are
certainly not the only tools. You can have replacements or
alternatives. You can (and should) supplement your toolset at
different points in your life. Choose your tools carefully, use the
right one(s) at the apropos time and good luck in life and career. I
personally would want to accumulate as many tools as possible to give
me a wide array of knowledge and options to address any particular
problem/circumstance.

Regards,
Sharif

Don't forget to tell all the kids that smoking doesn't cause cancer
either. A CompSci degree will help one inordinately to operate a
network. It is sad that so few in this field realize this.

Regards,
Sharif

Don't forget to tell all the kids that smoking doesn't cause cancer
either. A CompSci degree will help one inordinately to operate a
network. It is sad that so few in this field realize this.

Regards,
Sharif

Graph Theory. Routing Protocols. 'Nuff Said. :wink:

never be required to build one. This would be the perfect curriculum. I know Valdis is from VT, so I hope he's listening. Why

I just work at VT - my BS is in mathematics, with a physics minor,
Clarkson University '84. (OK, to be *really* technical, it's a math
degree because there wasn't a separate CS program/degree till '86, but
as a result I got zinged with a lot more calculus and related than the
average CS major)

my Comp Engineering program doesn't touch on anything related at all to
networking, and never even mentions the idea of security. So why not
create a focused area for this?

Stop by and talk to me or Randy Marchany about security - he taught a
grad-level class on it this semester. The biggest problem we're facing in
getting a full-fledged academic program going is that most of the people who
have a clue are the CIRT team, and we're all network operations and sysadmin
types - Randy's the only one of us who does much teaching and lecturing.

We get hit with a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem. We can't scare up
enough warm bodies(*) to teach more than one or two grad-level courses a
year in security. Meanwhile, the number of grad students who have enough
free course slots to *take* more than one or two classes is limited,
since all of the current "focused areas" have prerequisite lists of
classes. And creating a new "focused area" is a challenge - it sort of
presupposes having 2 or 3 PhD-level professors to teach the classes, and
given that VT is currently trying to trim it's budget by $25M, it's
unclear who'd pay for THAT...

/Valdis

(*) For some reason, the number of people who will teach a grad-level
course for free is quite limited - *I* certainly won't do it for free :wink:

I am currently studying a BSc degree in merry old England. I have
just finished my second year (well I'm part way through the exams).
When I applied to do my degree I found two universities whose course
were anything related to Networking. Mine is called Computing
(Networks and Communications).

I think we've pretty much been the guinea pigs for the course and
guess what, they didn't get it right first time.
Our first year entailed the following modules:
Business & Professional Skills
The Business & Professional Environment
Programming
Mathematics for Computing
Systems Analysis & Design
Principals of Computing Technologies

Not a single one of these modules made any effort to be network
related. The first two were similar and involved basic GCSE level
literature stuff along with spending a whole semester pretending to
run a company that made paint stripper out of pigeon excrement.
Programming was a very basic grounding in C++
Maths was again GCSE level with a bit of Matrices thrown in for the
Visualisation students. Systems Analysis and Design involved
theorising about making computerised versions of a couple of forms
for an obscure activities holiday company whilst Principals of
Computing Technologies tought us how to write assembler for the 8085
chip.

In year two we have done the following:
Networking Technologies
Unix Networking and Administration
Unix, Linux and X
Web Based Systems
Software Development: Concepts and Methods
Databases

Here we are getting there, but it isn't exactly serious stuff and is
the kind of thing you learn by spending your spare time fiddling
about with stuff. Networking tech involved mostly installing Windows
95 systems to do peer2peer stuff and client server stuff. One
experiment involved a basic Novell server install and another
involved a basic Cisco router configuration. Unix Net & Admin is how
to add/remove accounts, file permissions and giving an adapter an ip
address. Unix Linux and X is literally bash shell scripting on a
server with a weird configuration.
Web Based Systems, ahh yes. First semester was html and javascript.
They got as far as form tags and input checking. Second semester
involved being given some perl code for connecting to a database and
integrating it (putting a website in front of it).
SDCM is all about how Billy Bojo and Frank Redneck came up with X
theory about Y. I think about 80% of our course a) didn't see the
point in the subject b) didn't understand any of the teachers (it was
a rarety that they could speak English anywhere near properly) and c)
have failed this subject.
Databases was mysql. That was fairly useful in that it went into a
fair bit of depth about the commands.

Third year (next year) we are all on placements yet the uni still
charges �1000 for tuition fees.

I don't know what we're supposed to be doing in the fourth year
because all trace of our course description has been eradicated from
the website. It would appear, however that the people who started
their course this year have it better than us in that they are doing
all the networking stuff we did this year in the first year.

A list of next years networking degree is here:

http://www.shu.ac.uk/schools/cms/ug/courses.html

I would provide a link to the actual course but I can't be bothered
looking at their javascript. If its anything like the uni network,
it'll be hours of fun (took them and Novell two months to realise
that all the serious login problems were due to all the computers
trying to use a server that had been removed).

Oh well, I hope noone from the CIS or CMS departments read this list
or I might end up not coming back next year. That is just an example
of how little a degree in networks might actually mean. I worked 7
months nightshift at an ISP and learned far more relevant stuff than
the two years on a networking degree have taught me. Several times I
have considered giving it up and looking around for industry
certifications but I keep hoping that the next year will be
better...though that depends on whether I can find a placement that
doesn't just involve writing websites.
If anyone around here knows of a decent networking related company
that might offer an at least half decent placement then do let me
know. It seems this kind of placement is rather sparse this year.

I am currently studying a BSc degree in merry old England. I have
just finished my second year (well I'm part way through the exams).
When I applied to do my degree I found two universities whose course
were anything related to Networking. Mine is called Computing
(Networks and Communications).

I think we've pretty much been the guinea pigs for the course and
guess what, they didn't get it right first time.
Our first year entailed the following modules:
Business & Professional Skills
The Business & Professional Environment
Programming
Mathematics for Computing
Systems Analysis & Design
Principals of Computing Technologies

Not a single one of these modules made any effort to be network
related. The first two were similar and involved basic GCSE level
literature stuff along with spending a whole semester pretending to
run a company that made paint stripper out of pigeon excrement.
Programming was a very basic grounding in C++
Maths was again GCSE level with a bit of Matrices thrown in for the
Visualisation students. Systems Analysis and Design involved
theorising about making computerised versions of a couple of forms
for an obscure activities holiday company whilst Principals of
Computing Technologies tought us how to write assembler for the 8085
chip.

In year two we have done the following:
Networking Technologies
Unix Networking and Administration
Unix, Linux and X
Web Based Systems
Software Development: Concepts and Methods
Databases

Here we are getting there, but it isn't exactly serious stuff and is
the kind of thing you learn by spending your spare time fiddling
about with stuff. Networking tech involved mostly installing Windows
95 systems to do peer2peer stuff and client server stuff. One
experiment involved a basic Novell server install and another
involved a basic Cisco router configuration. Unix Net & Admin is how
to add/remove accounts, file permissions and giving an adapter an ip
address. Unix Linux and X is literally bash shell scripting on a
server with a weird configuration.
Web Based Systems, ahh yes. First semester was html and javascript.
They got as far as form tags and input checking. Second semester
involved being given some perl code for connecting to a database and
integrating it (putting a website in front of it).
SDCM is all about how Billy Bojo and Frank Redneck came up with X
theory about Y. I think about 80% of our course a) didn't see the
point in the subject b) didn't understand any of the teachers (it was
a rarety that they could speak English anywhere near properly) and c)
have failed this subject.
Databases was mysql. That was fairly useful in that it went into a
fair bit of depth about the commands.

Third year (next year) we are all on placements yet the uni still
charges �1000 for tuition fees.

I don't know what we're supposed to be doing in the fourth year
because all trace of our course description has been eradicated from
the website. It would appear, however that the people who started
their course this year have it better than us in that they are doing
all the networking stuff we did this year in the first year.

A list of next years networking degree is here:

http://www.shu.ac.uk/schools/cms/ug/courses.html

I would provide a link to the actual course but I can't be bothered
looking at their javascript. If its anything like the uni network,
it'll be hours of fun (took them and Novell two months to realise
that all the serious login problems were due to all the computers
trying to use a server that had been removed).

Oh well, I hope noone from the CIS or CMS departments read this list
or I might end up not coming back next year. That is just an example
of how little a degree in networks might actually mean. I worked 7
months nightshift at an ISP and learned far more relevant stuff than
the two years on a networking degree have taught me. Several times I
have considered giving it up and looking around for industry
certifications but I keep hoping that the next year will be
better...though that depends on whether I can find a placement that
doesn't just involve writing websites.
If anyone around here knows of a decent networking related company
that might offer an at least half decent placement then do let me
know. It seems this kind of placement is rather sparse this year.

Stephen Sprunk
Thus spake "Nigel Clarke" <nigel@forever-networks.com>
> Certifications are a waste of time. You'd be better off
> obtaining a Computer Science degree and focusing on the
> core technologies.

If you're looking to write software, sure. A CompSci degree
won't help you
in the slightest at operating networks.

Usually what you say is helpful. I have to disagree with
you here though. A few things I learned in a CIS degree program
which apply to networking:

bits/bytes/megabytes
queueing/stacks/buffers/ring buffers
data structures
undirected/directed graphs - routing
shortest path (Dijkstra's) algorithm = OSPF
spanning tree algorithm
ping :slight_smile:
scheme - command line compilers
bash/csh/tcsh/X - all useful in network management.
telnet
patience

I could go on...

Plus, when you are in the labs, and if you have the slightest
bit of geek curiosity, the mind wanders and you inevitably
have to find out how everything is connected.

Luckily the curiosity blossomed from there.

Thus spake "Nigel Clarke" <nigel@forever-networks.com>
> Certifications are a waste of time. You'd be better off
> obtaining a Computer Science degree and focusing on the
> core technologies.

If you're looking to write software, sure. A CompSci degree won't help you
in the slightest at operating networks.

Stephen - I bet I can do networks much much better than most cisco CCIEs,
even after years of doing network-unrelated work :slight_smile: That's because I
understand _why_ the stuff is working, not only how to make cisco box to
jump through hoops.

> Why would you devote your career to learning a vendor's
> command line or IOS?

You don't. You devote your career to learning networking. IOS is a base
skill which is necessary (today) to utilize that knowledge and, more
importantly, get a job.

Yawn. Are you serious? Sure, you need to have some idea of what things
are and how they work, but finding a magic incantation in IOS manual is
not something which only ceritified cisco "engineers" can do. Unless both
IOS and documentation deteriorated much much further than I think.

A person with lots of knowledge and no skills is a liberal arts major, not
an engineer.

One of the best network engineers is the world is a liberal arts major :slight_smile:

Academic respect doesn't pay the bills.

Sure, being a trained _technician_ pays bills. Just about. In my
experience, having a real education does much more. Also, need I to
remind you where the cisco (the company) came from? :slight_smile: [hint - it was a
certain university which had a need of IP routing boxes, and developed
them in house; they also created workstations along the way, known
nowadays only by the abbreviation from "Stanford University Network"]

> Then again, the question of CERTS vs. DEGREES might apply
> differently to someone without any experience. I guess it
> really depends on what your looking for.

Degrees are, in essence, a certificate that you are capable of learning
things by rote and regurgitating them later, possibly applying a small
amount of thought (but not too much).

Depends on where you got it. Try to get through MIT or Stanford by
learning thing by rote :slight_smile: I think you'll find yourself with self-esteem
below the floor, and a ticket home after the very first exams.

--vadim

> Thus spake "Nigel Clarke" <nigel@forever-networks.com>
> > Certifications are a waste of time. You'd be better off
> > obtaining a Computer Science degree and focusing on the
> > core technologies.
>
> If you're looking to write software, sure. A CompSci degree won't help you
> in the slightest at operating networks.

Stephen - I bet I can do networks much much better than most cisco CCIEs,
even after years of doing network-unrelated work :slight_smile: That's because I
understand _why_ the stuff is working, not only how to make cisco box to
jump through hoops.

Yes, but after you'll read a few books when you start working as a network
engineer again (if -:)).

CCIE just come and say _gays, you need Cisco XXX with IOS YY.YY and configure CEF,
RED,
packet inspection, bla bla bla... and he remember exact IOS commands.

If people want a narrow edicated engineer, they need CCIE-only gay. If they weant
someone who can do everything (may be, with extra time to learn specific piece of
hardware) - they need someone like Vadim.

And CCIE is not a good example - it's the BEST certification degree I ever know;
other certifications are much worst - most of them are just _guess an answer_
tests. Of course, knowing _top change a domain, you need to reinstall the system_
(from some old MS exam) is very important one (because no one can guess an
answer).

Btw, a friend of mine, very (VERY) high skilled gay, is looking for the new job
today. When I told about him with someone, I always explain _he worked with MS
and CISCO for a 10 years; he teach Microsoft in Moscow, he designed a networks, he
worked as a PS for a 2 years, he bring Ascends into the Russia, he know Everything
about MS and Cisco. Oh, you need his credentials - btw, he is CCIE and MS
certified engineer. I never start from certificates, because they say nothing
except _gay can read a books and can learn to answer a questions_.
(Do you need jobless CCIE + MS certified _do not remember who_? You can hire one
just now).