I know, it sounds scary asking that question as a Microsoft Certified Trainer but I think it does need to be asked. For those of you who don't know, Microsoft is taking a "new direction" with their certifications. Instead of having "premier" certs like the MCSE or the MCSD they are now offering shorter and more specialized choices like the MCTS or the MCITP. I don't think I like that.
When they first changed the MCSD to the new format, I accepted it because in the developer world, a person tends to be a web developer or a windows developer. It isn't that they don't have the capacity to write whatever code they want, it is just usually not required in their job. Having a more specialized cert makes sense there.
The problem is they have done the same thing to the MCSE. Most network administrators HAVE to be a jack of all trades. Their jobs are not as "all or nothing". I think having the "supreme" certification option is important to allow someone to show that they have that capacity. Of course, someone could say that you should just go out and get all of the certifications. I think that could be prohibitive, either financially or time wise since there are a lot of exams to take to do that.
What do you think?
Enter to win free training worth up to $2,500 from New Horizons Computer Learning Centers.
Ron got his start with computing way back when he first started programming on his Atari 800 computer back in 1980. He decided right then that he computers woukld be his career. He has been working in the IT field for 18 years. For the last 12 he has been an MCT at New Horizons in New York City where he has taught over 500 classes to more than 3000 students. He is also an MCSE and an MCSD.
Enter to win free training worth up to $2,500 from New Horizons Computer Learning Centers.
|
|
I agree. Having one or two
I agree. Having one or two overarching certs like MCSA and MCSE is nice, and there are a lot of job searches that filter by those. A whole new cert system, while nice to show specialization, doesn't reflect the true abilities of an admin.
I agree -- it's a HUGE mistake on MSFT's part
Splitting the certs up like this will do nothing but dilute the value of them. The overarching certs like MCSD and MCSE are still very very necessary. I think the only winner in this is the exam-taking centers, which means that techies are the ultimate losers. Sad.
Is it just me?
Is it just me or do the changes in the certification tracks not seem as huge as Microsoft claim they are?
Let me explain.
The MCTS seems mainly to be a replacement for the old MCP cert. Most of them cover a single exam, and you usually require a varying number of MCTS exams to be passed to get an MCITP certification. The benefit I see with the change is that each MCTS certification shows WHICH technology you certified in. In the old system you were an MCP whether you took a Client OS exam, a Server exam, an elective or what-have-you. There was no real way for employers to tell what you were an MCP in. In this respect I like the new track.
When it comes to the MCITP certifications, at least the ones replacing the MCSA/MCSE certs, there appears to be less of a change or even a point. To me it seems the MCITP: 2008 Server Administrator is very close to covering exactly what the old MCSA covered, while the MCITP" 2008 Enterprise Administrator covers pretty close to covering everything the old MCSE cert covered. I see very little benefit or change here aside from aligning the cert names with other certification tracks.
The MCITP cert for Exchange is a pretty big change from the old messaging specialization for MCSA/MCSE. My hypothesis here is that it might be because Exchange 2007 in some ways is more separated from AD than Exchange 2000/2003 was. In this sense it may make sense to totally separate it out as it's own certification track.
I'm still curious to see if there will be a special MCITP: Security track being rolled out. That one might be of interest to me.