Licensing Software Engineers Is in the Works (2012)

26 点作者 jervisfm超过 11 年前

20 条评论

droithomme超过 11 年前

The most powerful part of state licensing of professionals is the ability to punitively delicense people for actions the state disapproves of which have nothing to do with their competence in their field of work, depriving them of their career because of any arbitrary act of noncompliance in their lives.

noonespecial超过 11 年前

I'm all for it, as long as it doesn't become a supply control mechanism that has onerous BS requirements like "X years experience with a licensed union tradesmen". Software is notorious for the "1 year of experience repeated 10 times" problem. Theses tests should be about pure aptitude.Warning: If certification becomes more about permission than proficiency, you'll get corruption instead of competence.

评论 #6317655 未加载

评论 #6317450 未加载

morgante超过 11 年前

What a terrible idea. Software is a rapidly evolving field which simply can't be captured by a single examination or a set amount of experience.Indeed, apparently "four to six of experience" would be required. So suddenly no 20-somethings can work in software which might impact "public health or safety, security, property, or the economy." Say goodbye to half the tech teams at health and fintech startups...

评论 #6317754 未加载

评论 #6317715 未加载

coldcode超过 11 年前

Pointless, no matter how you spin it. Real engineers deal with measurable items like gravity and wind and light that don't change. Software can be anything, any language, any target, any industry, any size, any skill level required, etc. There is nothing practical to test that relates to everything. In my 3 decades of being a programmer there is absolutely nothing meaningful remaining from my first job: if I had had some magical license it would be pointless today.

评论 #6317986 未加载

wavefunction超过 11 年前

Right now I tend to think of Software Engineering as an ad-hoc guild, where one can gain entry simply by proficiency and talent and recognition of those attributes by your peers, fellow software engineers. It's a system that seems to work relatively well.This licensing business seems to be an attempt to cut software engineers out of this peerage for the sake of HR, in addition to being a cash-grab as mentioned by other posters.

评论 #6317837 未加载

highlander超过 11 年前

I wonder how this will fare compared to the efforts of the BCS (British Computer Society), who have tried to push 'certification' for years with their MBCS (Member of the British Computer Society), Chartered Engineer and Chartered IT Professional certifications. I got all three years ago and then ditched them because (i) I have yet to find an employer who gives a flying XXXX about them, (ii) some employers see them as a 'warning sign' of mediocrity like 'Sun Certified Java Programmer' became and (iii) I had to pay every year to renew them.

geebee超过 11 年前

Is software development a branch of engineering or mathematics?I'm ok with them forcing me take additional coursework to pass the FE exam as long as they also have to go back to school and take a year of real analysis, a year of abstract algebra, and a semester of complex analysis. I'd prefer to see number theory, with proofs, as well. I'm sure we can come up with a difficult and expensive comprehensive exam as an extra hurdle.This has about as much to do with software "engineering" as the FE exam.

peeters超过 11 年前

Software Engineers in Canada are already able to become licensed Professional Engineers after graduating from an accredited Software Engineering program, writing the ethics exam, and gaining the prerequisite experience working under another engineer.However, because there is no current requirement for any software to be certified by an engineer, most graduates don't care much to get it, and won't end up working directly under a P. Eng. anyway. So in my experience it hasn't really taken off as a licensed discipline. I have an Iron Ring, but that's as far as my P. Eng. path has progressed.

评论 #6318002 未加载

iradik超过 11 年前

Funny, I don't see coding ability, distributed systems, or algorithms anywhere in the exam spec, which is what most engineering teams actually interview on. Also, though I've been an "engineer" for the past five years, I don't have a college degree which means I'm ineligible for taking this test. Therefore, "the public" won't be able to trust me to write code for them, whatever that means. Thank goodness I never plan on taking a government job.

balabaster超过 11 年前

As if this is going to make the slightest lick of difference. Those that are already employed and producing good quality code aren't going to get canned from a company. Managers are going to evaluate those that deliver and make a choice "can I afford to lose this guy just because he hasn't got a license?" No! Likewise, those who are moving fast and breaking things are those that are starting their own companies and finding lucrative exit strategies by getting aquihired.The funny thing is, once you're proven, it doesn't matter what your credentials say. Demand speaks volumes more than paperwork, and it always will. Risk is all about perception, that little license says "the State thinks this guy is less of a risk than another," but let's face it, when it comes down to it, would you hire the guy who started the last Twitter/Facebook/Foursquare that isn't licensed, or the guy that just moved in next door you never heard of that has the license?Just like the MCSD/MCSE, it'll go out of the window the minute everyone realizes that the piece of paper doesn't actually mean this guy can deliver, it just means that he can pass an exam.

angersock超过 11 年前

“Just as practicing professionals such as doctors, accountants, and nurses are licensed, so should software engineers,” Thornton says. “The public needs to be able to rely on some sort of credential when choosing a contractor to write software.”Yep, and thank God America's healthcare is so affordable because of these licensing requirements!What a horrid idea.EDIT:Here's the deal. I'm a mechanical engineer by training, and could've after several years of paying dues gotten my Professional Engineer cert. There are technical fields where I demand that the products I consume (especially those which service thousands of people every day, as is the case with public infrastructure) have a very strong line of qualification.The fact is that >>99% of software (as it is consumed today) does not require anything near the formal qualifications of civil or structural or chemical engineering.If you want a really poignant reminder of how having professional engineers with quality control and certification can result in bad progress, go look at what's become of NASA and Armadillo Aerospace.We are so lucky to be in a field where our ability to ship working code is valued above our ability to get off whoever the current power broker is (and this includes investors).Let's not willfully throw away that windfall.EDIT2:If we expect to conduct business as has become the norm these days--move fast, break things, learn, repeat--and as has done so well for us as an industry, doing anything which artificially limits the supply of potential hands is bad. Doing anything which prevents people from trying new things with minimum investment is bad.They don't understand us, and they're greedy bastards, so Something Must Be Done (and this is not only for .gov folks--the professional groups have a lot riding on being seen as useful. Jane and Bob the Bad Coders stand a lot to gain by collecting dues for the American Society of Software Engineers).Actually, that's kind of funny. American Society of Software Engineers. ASSEs. Huh.

评论 #6318231 未加载

评论 #6317940 未加载

ChuckMcM超过 11 年前

I'm sure few people remember the Certified Data Processor exam (CPD) but I thought it was hilarious. I took the practice exam in high school in the 70's and passed. It was more about data management practices than actual computer knowledge, interestingly by knowing how computers worked you could infer what the best practices would be, and hence my ability to pass it by just figuring out what would "make sense" to any of the 250 multiple choice questions.However, it has also been a source of disgust for me that companies would refuse any sort of warranty for their software at all. What sort of company sells you a widget and tells you, "By the way the box may just contain air for all we know, we don't warrant that it does anything!"The risk of liability was too huge. Nobody wanted to sign up for their operating system crashing when you're rocket took off, or their spreadsheet getting the numbers wrong because binary really wasn't a great system for representing fractional decimal numbers.I would be all in favor of fixing this total "get out of jail free" card first before we try to figure out who to license software professionals.

johnrob超过 11 年前

Reliable software has more to do with proper testing than proper engineering. Rather than license engineers, they should license QA methodologies.

jloughry超过 11 年前

Title should say (2012).It is, nonetheless, a good article. The software engineering exam is offered once a year, in April; the first one was in April, 2013.

评论 #6317759 未加载

lightblade超过 11 年前

I tried to register for the exam, but didn't find software engineer as one of the options. Turns out the SE exam is not offered in California.I think it may be reasonable because this kind of certificate can be disruptive to the current way of things. The government may not want to take the risk on something so vital to California's economy.

walshemj超过 11 年前

Well I looked at doing the professional development in the the UK but the BCS/IEE kept changing the rules on prior experience.The main question is whats in it for me? what benefits do you get and what since brunell died have the professional bodies done for engineering profession in the UK.Ps and I already have gone part of the way down the mech eng track

moron4hire超过 11 年前

I'm a freelancer in Virginia. I work on web apps for companies that want to figure out their sales figures better. I work on reports for non-profits who want to see how they are raising money. What hospital in its right mind would buy a heart monitor from someone like me? What car manufacturer in their right mind would want me to work on their control systems?I could do it, but that's not the point. Those examples they provide, they are already controlled. They're already covered by very large corporations that have these sorts of controls in place. If they subcontract out to me, the responsibility lies with them to verify that my work is suitable.This is just about preventing people like me from doing what we're trying to do: quit our jobs, make some money, bring their friends in and bootstrap a company.

评论 #6318282 未加载

aaronbrethorst超过 11 年前

Here are the specifications: <a href="http://cdn1.ncees.co/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Exam-specifications_PE-Software-Apr-2013.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://cdn1.ncees.co/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Exam-specifi...</a>

skalawag超过 11 年前

an activity's being called "software engineering" does not make it any more likely to be a form of engineering than one's being called "armstrong" makes one more likely to be strong. we might as well call it "software writing." it is obvious that lives will depend on some software working as expected. the solution is not to license the writers of the software, but to make sure software doesn't fail in ways that could end lives. a certification scheme doesn't add anything to the solution of this problem if the solution doesn't already exist.

superuser2超过 11 年前

How would this work with "software engineers" who are educated as Computer Scientists? Not everyone who writes important software was necessarily trained as an engineer, nor do they really need to be.