Poll #2 Closed, Poll #3 Opened

The results of poll #2 are in. The question was "What is the optimal recertification period?". Twenty-four votes were cast. The results were:

• 1 year: 0 votes (0%)
• 2 years: 9 votes (37%)
• 3 years: 8 votes (33%)
• 4 years: 4 votes (16%)
• None, once certified always certified: 3 votes (12%)

So the majority seems to be in favor of the current recertification period.

Now for a new poll. This one concerns the recertification method. Realistically we have to expect recertification to cost money, so let's put that aside. What else should be required?

Currently a test is required for recertification. But other professions use different models. For instance, I'm a Professional Engineer in the state of Michigan. Recertification in Michigan requires only a fee. No testing is required. In other states there are requirements that a certain number of Continuing Education Units (CEUs) be earned during the certification period. CEUs are earned by taking classes, attending conferences, giving presentations at user group meetings, attending user group meetings, etc. Should CEUs be introduced into the LabVIEW certification system? For instance, perhaps CEUs could be used to waive the test. Earn enough CEUs and you don't take a recert test, but if you fall short you do take the test. Or perhaps CEUs should be required in addition to the test. Cast your vote in the poll and let me know what you think.

Poll #1 Closed, Poll #2 Opened

Poll #1 is now closed. The question was "Is certification in general a good thing for the LabVIEW community?". There were 28 responses with 25 (89%) voting yes and 3 (11%) voting no. The good news is that a large majority thinks certification is a good thing. The bad news is that a significant number thinks that it is not a good thing. I'm particularly interested in hearing more about why people think that certification is not a good thing and would appreciate any comments you would like to leave about the subject.

Now on to Poll #2. Recertification in most fields is a fact of life. This poll concerns the time necessary between recertifications. Assuming that all other factors are to your liking (cost, recertification methed, etc.) what do you think the optimal period between recertifications should be?

Is certification a good thing for the LabVIEW community?

I gave a talk at NI Week '08 titled "From Spaghetti Code to State Machines: One Man's Journey through the Certification Process" about the positive effect certification has had on my LabVIEW programming ability and style. The talk was on Tuesday and it generated some interesting and sometimes heated conversations the rest of the week. People would come up to me, tell me they liked my talk, and would proceed to give me their opinions on the topic. It was great, I didn't have to solicit people's opinions, they just came up to me and started talking. The responses tended to follow a bipolar distribution. People said either "That was my story you told!" or "Certification sucks, it's just a way for NI to milk their user base for more money!".

I hope to discuss these responses more fully in future posts, but for now I've put a poll on the sidebar of this blog asking a very simple question. Is certification a good thing for the LabVIEW community? This is not a referendum on NI's current implementation of the certification process. I'll save that for future polls. This is simply a thumbs up, thumbs down vote on certification in general. Do we need it? Is it beneficial?

This is an important question to us as a community. Certification is a major part of how the LabVIEW community relates to National Instruments. If certification is a bad idea, we should tell NI to scrap it. If it is a good idea, we should be part of the process of helping NI improve it. Which is it going to be?