News
MCSD Revisions on Tap
MCP Magazine has learned Microsoft is in the midst of revising MCSD certification track requirements.
Officially, though, Microsoft remains
tight-lipped about any changes. “The MCSD is definitely
being revised for .NET,” said Tina Koyama-Wasser
of Microsoft’s Skills and Certification group.
“That’s all we can say for now.”
The current MCSD track consists of
four exams: three core and one elective. The former
requires candidates demonstrate their expertise
in solution architecture and desktop and distributed
applications development (implementing C++ 6.0,
FoxPro 6.0 or Visual Basic 6.0). The latter requires
proof of skills with various Microsoft development
tools. Currently, close to 18,000 individuals
hold the MCSD certification.
According to sources, the revised
MCSD certification track would cover more ground
than the present track, with a seven-exam framework:
five core and two elective. The new exams would
cover C++; Visual Basic; C#; and a new version
of FoxPro, FoxPro 7.0. An emphasis on .NET would
be seen on exams covering Web Forms and Windows
Forms development, while .NET-specific questions
could appear on the Solution Architectures exam
(Exam 70-100 in the current MCSD track). The new
MCSD set of tests also could feature a case-study-based
Component Design exam, plus a developer version
of the Highly Available Web Solutions exam that
soon will be part of the MCSE program.
Two regular MCP Magazine contributors,
both MCSDs, view the suggested new track in a
negative light. “This...shows that Microsoft certification
is driven by marketing,” said Mike Gunderloy.
“When Windows 2000 came into being, Microsoft
made it so that current MCSEs have to recertify
for Win2K. Now, Microsoft’s marketing people have
been given new marching orders—push .NET—and it
looks like we might end up with an MCSD track
that reflects that.”
Paul Brown echoed these comments,
saying the suggested track makes it appear as
if Microsoft is “forcing .NET down people’s throats.”
He thinks Microsoft could approach a revised MCSD
track in a more even-handed way, for example,
offering two versions of the Solution Architectures
exam—one concentrating on .NET and the other on
conventional architecture.
“All MCSD candidates would still
have to take the Solution Architectures exam,”
Brown explained, “but they’d have a choice. They
could focus on what’s most important to them in
their work.”
Brown also thinks having seven exams
in a new MCSD track, vs. the current four, would
put an increased burden on MCSD candidates. Not
only would it take longer to earn the MCSD following
an expanded track, but also the dollar cost of
preparing for and taking seven exams would add
up.
“Face it. Up to now people haven’t
exactly been breaking down the door to get the
MCSD,” Brown said. “If you make it even more difficult
and expensive to earn, I think you may end up
hurting the certification.”
Gunderloy questions if a new MCSD
track, or for that matter, the existing one, is
really the best way to certify developer skills.
If Microsoft is “truly serious” about ascertaining
proficiency using its developer tools, he said,
the company would simply test each MCSD candidate’s
ability to write code.
“Unfortunately, it wouldn’t be possible
to conduct this kind of testing on a mass scale,”
Gunderloy said. “It would be just be too expensive
and labor intensive. But it would be the right
way to judge a developer’s skills.”