Difference between revisions of "R Certification"
| (7 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
We understand that there are multiple moving pieces and we have identified 3 main areas to bucket them – | We understand that there are multiple moving pieces and we have identified 3 main areas to bucket them – | ||
| + | |||
1. Specialization | 1. Specialization | ||
| + | |||
2. Training | 2. Training | ||
| + | |||
3. Testing | 3. Testing | ||
| + | |||
4. Certification | 4. Certification | ||
| + | |||
We have also taken a stab at the sub categories under those buckets and the multiple paths that we can have for those functional areas that would allow the R Community to solve for the above mentioned challenges. | We have also taken a stab at the sub categories under those buckets and the multiple paths that we can have for those functional areas that would allow the R Community to solve for the above mentioned challenges. | ||
| Line 23: | Line 28: | ||
1. Financials – | 1. Financials – | ||
| − | + | * Cost | |
| − | + | ** Vendor Cost | |
| − | + | ** Consortium Cost | |
| − | + | ** Student Cost | |
| − | + | * Profits | |
2. Marketing and Promotions | 2. Marketing and Promotions | ||
3. Testing | 3. Testing | ||
| − | + | * Pass/Fail outcome | |
| − | + | * Percentage – 0 to 100% | |
| − | + | * Certification Levels | |
4. How long the certificate remains valid | 4. How long the certificate remains valid | ||
5. Partnerships | 5. Partnerships | ||
| − | + | * Training | |
| − | + | * Testing | |
| − | + | * Certifications | |
6. Curriculum – | 6. Curriculum – | ||
| − | + | * Generic | |
| − | + | * Pharmacy | |
| − | + | * Financial | |
| − | + | * Visualizations | |
| − | + | * Others | |
7. Phased Approach | 7. Phased Approach | ||
| − | + | * Identify the next couple of phases | |
| − | + | * Phase 1 | |
| − | + | * Phase 2 | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
== Members == | == Members == | ||
| Line 59: | Line 62: | ||
* Mark Sellors (Mango Solution) | * Mark Sellors (Mango Solution) | ||
* Aimee Gott (Mango Solutions) | * Aimee Gott (Mango Solutions) | ||
| − | * Hadley Wickham (ISC liason, RStudio) | + | * ''Hadley Wickham (ISC liason, RStudio)'' |
* Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel (RStudio) | * Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel (RStudio) | ||
* Dinesh Nirmal (IBM) | * Dinesh Nirmal (IBM) | ||
| − | * MeharPratap Singh (ProCogia) | + | * Trishan de Lanerolle (Linux Foundation) |
| + | * '''MeharPratap Singh (ProCogia)''' | ||
| + | * JuanPablo Murillo (ProCogia) | ||
== Milestones == | == Milestones == | ||
| Line 71: | Line 76: | ||
== Minutes == | == Minutes == | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== 2/1 Working Group Meeting ==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Attendees: Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel, Trishan de Lanerolle, Mehar Singh, JuanPablo Murillo, Mark Sellors | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Identified tech representatives in partner companies to collaborate on domain objective for certification. | ||
| + | * Discussed potential focuses of certification and certification seeker’s profile. | ||
| + | * Agreed on reaching out to connections at Linux Foundation for their expertise in technical certification logistics and setup. | ||
| + | * Updated deadline of domain objective completion to 2/28 and deadline of opening domain objective to R community in mid March. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==== 2/13, 2/22, 3/1 Technical Representative Meetings - Domain Objective ==== | ||
| + | Attendees: Richie Cotton, Aimee Gott, Garrett Grolemund, Mehar Singh, JuanPablo Murillo, Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel, Jeremy Reynolds, Nick Carchedi | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Developed a comprehensive content outline, which breaks R programming proficiency into several competency areas. | ||
| + | * Put together a list of packages/libraries to accompany content outline. | ||
| + | * Discussed and proposed a composite score in addition to a pass/fail final score. Composite score would take into account mastery within each competency area of the outline. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ====3/17 Working Group Meeting==== | ||
| + | Attendees: Richie Cotton, Aimee Gott, Mehar Singh, JuanPablo Murillo, Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel, Mark Sellors, Nick Carchedi, Clyde Seepersad, David Smith | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Updated larger group of recent progress with regard to certification topics and scoring approach. | ||
| + | * Shared completed certification content outline and package list internally with the Working Group. | ||
| + | * Discussed financial details of launching a performance based certification with an expert in the field. | ||
Latest revision as of 16:01, 17 March 2017
Contents
Background
We have seen an exponential increase in the demand of R among a large and variant set of audiences. People from various domains are keen to learn it and further improve their skills. This has created a supply and demand gap which is being filled by various teaching channels. While there is no dearth of the amount of R teaching material, both in-class and online, there is still arguably a shortage in skilled R users who possess quality skills in R. This shortage of qualified personnel and abundance of self-taught data scientists leads to confusion for employers as well as prospective employees who have the required skill-set but no way to differentiate themselves.
Proposal
There is no system today to certify qualified R Professionals. The R-Consortium, as the governing body for the R community, needs to step in as the neutral agency before another third-party comes in with a similar certification mechanism and tries to fill this gap. From a competitive perspective, SPSS and SAS already has a certification mechanism in place.
Moving Parts
We understand that there are multiple moving pieces and we have identified 3 main areas to bucket them –
1. Specialization
2. Training
3. Testing
4. Certification
We have also taken a stab at the sub categories under those buckets and the multiple paths that we can have for those functional areas that would allow the R Community to solve for the above mentioned challenges.
Key decisions to be made
The WG will work on the following elements regarding R certification:
1. Financials –
- Cost
- Vendor Cost
- Consortium Cost
- Student Cost
- Profits
2. Marketing and Promotions 3. Testing
- Pass/Fail outcome
- Percentage – 0 to 100%
- Certification Levels
4. How long the certificate remains valid 5. Partnerships
- Training
- Testing
- Certifications
6. Curriculum –
- Generic
- Pharmacy
- Financial
- Visualizations
- Others
7. Phased Approach
- Identify the next couple of phases
- Phase 1
- Phase 2
Members
- David Smith (Microsoft)
- Jeremy Reynolds (Microsoft)
- Jonathan Cornelissen (Datacamp)
- Martijn Theuwissen (DataCamp)
- Mark Sellors (Mango Solution)
- Aimee Gott (Mango Solutions)
- Hadley Wickham (ISC liason, RStudio)
- Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel (RStudio)
- Dinesh Nirmal (IBM)
- Trishan de Lanerolle (Linux Foundation)
- MeharPratap Singh (ProCogia)
- JuanPablo Murillo (ProCogia)
Milestones
Achieved
Open Questions
Minutes
2/1 Working Group Meeting
Attendees: Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel, Trishan de Lanerolle, Mehar Singh, JuanPablo Murillo, Mark Sellors
- Identified tech representatives in partner companies to collaborate on domain objective for certification.
- Discussed potential focuses of certification and certification seeker’s profile.
- Agreed on reaching out to connections at Linux Foundation for their expertise in technical certification logistics and setup.
- Updated deadline of domain objective completion to 2/28 and deadline of opening domain objective to R community in mid March.
2/13, 2/22, 3/1 Technical Representative Meetings - Domain Objective
Attendees: Richie Cotton, Aimee Gott, Garrett Grolemund, Mehar Singh, JuanPablo Murillo, Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel, Jeremy Reynolds, Nick Carchedi
- Developed a comprehensive content outline, which breaks R programming proficiency into several competency areas.
- Put together a list of packages/libraries to accompany content outline.
- Discussed and proposed a composite score in addition to a pass/fail final score. Composite score would take into account mastery within each competency area of the outline.
3/17 Working Group Meeting
Attendees: Richie Cotton, Aimee Gott, Mehar Singh, JuanPablo Murillo, Mine Cetinkaya-Rundel, Mark Sellors, Nick Carchedi, Clyde Seepersad, David Smith
- Updated larger group of recent progress with regard to certification topics and scoring approach.
- Shared completed certification content outline and package list internally with the Working Group.
- Discussed financial details of launching a performance based certification with an expert in the field.
