My Thoughts On why you should do the certification

[Simon Wirtz]

Hi guys,

I started writing on my blog. Maybe this post is interesting for those of you who still don't know for sure if taking the exam is a good thing to do...

___

https://blog.simon-wirtz.de/?p=43

___
Feedback is appreciated.

Cheers
Simon

[Roel De Nijs]

Simon Wirtz wrote:Feedback is appreciated.

The official name of the second exam is "Java SE 7 Programmer II" and if you have passed both exams, you'll be granted the "Oracle Certified Professional, Java SE 7 Programmer" title. So there's a (minor) typo in the exam name: "OCA SE 7 Programmer II" should be "OCP SE 7 Programmer II".

And the gist of your blog post is very similar to the advice I give when someone asks "how can I get the OCA certification as soon as possible?". I always advise against this approach and give my personal opinion: Give yourself enough time to prepare. Don't rush! The journey becoming certified is much more important than that piece of paper itself. If you take your time to prepare, you'll become a much better developer with a good understanding of Java and OO basics. You'll get much more out of your certification than someone who's preparing to just pass the exam. No doubt! (and of course the same applies for the OCP certification exam as well)

[Simon Wirtz]

Hi Roel,

That's absolutely right. Thank you

[Andrew McDonald]

I agree with you that it's a useful exercise to get certified.  My only issue with the certification exams is that there are some overly concocted scenarios that really are not practical.  If there were few of these tricky questions, it would be a more enjoyable experience. 

[Roel De Nijs]

Andrew McDonald wrote:My only issue with the certification exams is that there are some overly concocted scenarios that really are not practical. If there were few of these tricky questions, it would be a more enjoyable experience.

And what do you define as a tricky question? A complex loop statement with a variable which is used outside its scope?

[Andrew McDonald]

No, you describe something easy.  Here's something that I just saw today...have you ever seen code like this in practice?

public class AnotherTest {
    static {
        add(2);
    }
     
    static void add(int num) {
        System.out.print(num + " ");
    }
     
    AnotherTest() {
        add(5);
    }
     
    static {
        add(4);
    }
     
    {
        add(6);
    }
 
    static {
        new AnotherTest();
    }
     
    {
        add(8);
    }
 
    public static void main(String[] args) { }
}

[Roel De Nijs]

Andrew McDonald wrote:Here's something that I just saw today...have you ever seen code like this in practice?

I have seen much worse than that in production code And I have used static initializer blocks myself, mostly (if not always) limited to only one block. Can't remember I have ever used instance initializer blocks. On the other hand the purpose of this question is crystal-clear: it will test your knowledge about the execution order of static initializer blocks, instance initializer blocks and constructors. But the question could even be more trickier by introducing a parent class having some initializer blocks as well, adding a bit of method overriding,... Honestly for me this is not a tricky question, in fact it's an easy question which is quite easy to answer (if you know the required concepts). But that's probably very personal: everybody has his/her own idea about what's a trick question and if you have already a lot of experience with Java certification exams (like me ), you know very well what to expect. Practice makes (almost) perfect!

I do think such questions are definitely a minority on the certification exam and might be used to differentiate between a 80% passing score and a 95% one.

[Simon Wirtz]

Andrew McDonald wrote:I agree with you that it's a useful exercise to get certified.  My only issue with the certification exams is that there are some overly concocted scenarios that really are not practical.  If there were few of these tricky questions, it would be a more enjoyable experience. 

I agree with you Andrew. I think many scenarios will actually never really matter. But that's probably also because we're used to working in IDEs which often fix problems for us on the fly And you are right, sometimes it's hard to learn these specific topics. Yet, I'd always recommend to learn it anyways.