"itshouldbesaid" wrote in message
news:8156ad4c-819c-4f6a-928f-69b5aad17693@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> Programming is intensive work, the kind of development work I have
> undertaken required continuous thought and I have always done this in
> complete isolation; it would not be viable for me to attempt such work
> even with just other people around let alone watching what I was
> doing.
Mr Bates was President of the Institution of Analysts and Programmers from
1993. Are you by any chance a member of that organisation?
What an interesting website.
"People join us principally for the prestige and privilege of associating
with some of the leading professionals in this sector of the industry. "
"IAP membership is for practising IT professionals with a proven track
record. There are five grades of membership; your grade will depend on
training, qualifications and experience, which we measure using a unique
points system."
Fascinating. A unique points system. Let's look at that:
"Applications are evaluated using a bespoke points system, that takes full
account of the quantity and quality of the applicant's academic
qualifications, vocational training and working experience.
Typical points values are:
Honours degrees in Computing from mainstream universities300 to 400
Other computer-related degrees and equivalents200 to 300
Intermediate computer-related qualifications
(C&G; college diplomas etc)100 to 250
Short vocational training courses (including
business where relevant)Up to 100
Relevant workplace experience, per year50 to 100
In simple terms the totals required for admission to the various grades of
membership are:
Licentiate (LIAP)150 points
Graduate (GradIAP)250 points
Associate Member (AMIAP)350 points
Member (MIAP)700 points (650 after two years as AMIAP)
Fellow (FIAP)700++ then at the discretion of the Council
However, being a professional body the Institution is concerned to assess
applicants on the same basis as employers will, on their professional skills
and experience. We believe professionals should have all-round abilities,
not just a narrow specialisation. The IAP system ensures that applicants
meet these requirements by using different types of points:
A PointsSystems analysis and design
P PointsProgramming
B PointsBusiness
X pointsOther factors
Buried in the bald totals above there are additional constraints, designed
to ensure that applicants have a balance of the skills and experience
appropriate for a professional person at that grade. For example it is not
possible to achieve Member status with three degrees but no knowledge of
business, because the system does not allow it.
It is possible for applicants with no academic qualifications or formal
training to join the Institution, even at the highest levels."
unquote
As Mr Bates said himself, on his website (now taken down, but available for
perusal on the Wayback Machine): "In this industry, it is relatively easy
for anyone who "knows a bit about computers" to claim a level of expertise
that they simply do not have. Within the British judicial system it is
simple for such people to present themselves as expert witnesses - after
all, who is going to know? Only another expert - and as a judge once
remarked, "mud slinging between experts is never a very edifying spectacle
for the jury.".... Within the English legal system there is no specific
mechanism for challenging the competence of an expert witness. Even
pointing out that the evidence presented is factually incorrect is fraught
with problems. Arguing about technical facts can quickly leave a jury
perplexed and bewildered - and provides little assistance to the court. It
may even be that such controversy is deliberately engineered in order to
create spurious doubt in the minds of the jury. There is a process known
as a Newton Hearing, whereby a judge can order conflicting expert testimony
to be presented to a court in the absence of the jury so that a decision can
be be made upon what evidence (if any) is to be admitted. Unfortunately
this can be difficult, costly and time consuming, and judges are rarely
amenable to anything which is likely to extend the time and cost of a trial.
Thus even a genuine challenge becomes difficult to mount with any reasonable
prospect of success. In such a new field as computer forensics, this is
becoming a serious problem since virtually anyone with a little knowledge of
computers finds it easy to convince lawyers, barristers and judges that they
are an expert and that their opinions are valid and reliable."
Who'd have thought it.
|