SCJA or SCJP??

dineshrohra

hey guys.. can ne1 of u help me out..
i wanna do a certification in java.. i hav just graduated out of college with a B.E. degree and hav basic programming knowledge of C and C++.. bt i do nt hav ne knowledge about java.. which certification shud i go for.. scja or scjp??.. i've heard scjp is tougher thn scja.. pls give ur opinion..
also if i go fr scja or scjp.. do i need to join ne coaching classes or self study is quite enugh fr these exams??.. thanx..

down77

Speaking as someone who is about to take the SCJA, the exam that you take really depends on how much experience you have with the Java programming language and how comfortable you feel with your skill-set. The SCJA is the Associate (entry level) exam that Sun offers for those who are looking to prove competency on J2SE 1.5/1.6. The SCJP exam is a Professional level exam for those who wish to display a more advanced knowledge of the J2EE language and who should have at a minimum of 1 year experience coding/developing with Java.

Since I have ~3mos experience with the language I will be taking the SCJA (CX-310-019) exam in the next month and continue improving my skill-set in hopes of taking the SCJP sometime next year. The materials I have been using include:

Murach Java 2 SE (Thanks for the tip JD!)
SCJA by Cameron McKenzie
Sun Official Curriculum WJB-110-SE6

I hope this helps answer your question.

dineshrohra

thanx.. i think i'll go for SCJA since i'm new to java..

apena7

I just passed the SCJA yesterday.

I can tell you that the SCJA focuses more on the theory behind Java, rather than coding. For example, you can learn how to assign a value to a variable, but do you know the other ways you can perform that same task? What will happen if you leave out a line of code -- will it compile? If not, what type of error will you receive? Will it compile but produce no output? Along with that fun stuff, you'll also need to learn the technologies behind J2SE, J2ME, and J2EE.

One last piece of advice, study UML backwards and forwards -- learn how to convert the diagram to code and vice-versa (my weakest area).

JDMurray

Keep your eye on Discount Sun Microsystems Exam Vouchers at GetCertify4Less.com for discount Sun Java exam vouchers.

down77

apena7 wrote: »

I just passed the SCJA yesterday.

I can tell you that the SCJA focuses more on the theory behind Java, rather than coding. For example, you can learn how to assign a value to a variable, but do you know the other ways you can perform that same task? What will happen if you leave out a line of code -- will it compile? If not, what type of error will you receive? Will it compile but produce no output? Along with that fun stuff, you'll also need to learn the technologies behind J2SE, J2ME, and J2EE.

One last piece of advice, study UML backwards and forwards -- learn how to convert the diagram to code and vice-versa (my weakest area).

You had mentioned the prosoft materials, did you use any other text? Currently reading the Cameron McKenzie SCJA guide since the prosoft book had a lot of gaps. I did notice that the book heavily influences UML!!!

apena7

Yes, I used the prosoft books to practice coding. They were good for learning Java, but not for passing the SCJA, if you get my meaning. Stick the Cameron McKenzie's SCJA Study Guide and Mock Exam books as these were written specifically for the SCJA in mind.

Solaris_UNIX

I heard that some of those Java certification questions from Sun are really, REALLY, tough. As in you don't just need to know how to program in JAVA, but you also need to know a lot about the theory (i.e. will it compile or not if you change this part of code here, etc.)

Here's a link to a mock exam to give you an idea just how tricky some of these pesky theory questions can be:

Mock Java Certification Exam

apena7

It's tough because the examples given are nonsensical. I'm sure we can all figure out how a program works and how the methods relate to each other by reading their given names. But for a test, you aren't given that kind of context. You need to look at method Foo and how it relates to method Bar. Couple that with a few abstract and concrete classes, plus an instance variable thrown into the mix and you'll be thinking "what is this garbage?"

I suppose it's not about what makes sense, but instead, what is possible.

Solaris_UNIX

apena7 wrote: »

But for a test, you aren't given that kind of context. You need to look at method Foo and how it relates to method Bar. Couple that with a few abstract and concrete classes, plus an instance variable thrown into the mix and you'll be thinking "what is this garbage?"

I suppose it's not about what makes sense, but instead, what is possible.

If I didn't know any better I would have suspected that it was no less than James Gosling himself who is dreaming up these outrageous questions (he still works at Sun you know):

James Gosling - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you look at the caliber of engineers that have worked at Sun in the last 20 years- guys like Andreas von Bechtolsheim, James Gosling, and Bill Joy (Bill Joy is the man who single handedly wrote the vi editor and the entire TCP/IP stack for BSD UNIX that got re-used in System V UNIX and later on even in Windows NT):

Bill Joy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

These guys are not "light-weight" intellects, in fact they are some of the heaviest hitters in the history of UNIX, so what is easy and trivial for them might not be easy and trivial for mere mortals like us.

It's almost as bad as having Brian Kernighan and Dennis Ritchie (the guys who invented the C programming language) write up your final exam for C programming class in college or having Bjarne Stroustrup teaching your C++ class. Do you have any idea how nightmarishly difficult that could be?

varelg

apena7 wrote: »

It's tough because the examples given are nonsensical. I'm sure we can all figure out how a program works and how the methods relate to each other by reading their given names. But for a test, you aren't given that kind of context. You need to look at method Foo and how it relates to method Bar. Couple that with a few abstract and concrete classes, plus an instance variable thrown into the mix and you'll be thinking "what is this garbage?"

I suppose it's not about what makes sense, but instead, what is possible.

And that is exactly why I didn't sit the exam although I started preparing for it, choosing instead to grab some projects first and stuff my resume with that instead of the cert.
Other than stuffing a resume of a newcomer to the field of Java coding or employer asking for certs of his Java coding staff, I don't see any compelling reason why sitting an exam of that type, that "tests" what you don't know.

varelg

Solaris_UNIX wrote: »

If I didn't know any better I would have suspected that it was no less than James Gosling himself who is dreaming up these outrageous questions (he still works at Sun you know):

James Gosling - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you look at the caliber of engineers that have worked at Sun in the last 20 years- guys like Andreas von Bechtolsheim, James Gosling, and Bill Joy (Bill Joy is the man who single handedly wrote the vi editor and the entire TCP/IP stack for BSD UNIX that got re-used in System V UNIX and later on even in Windows NT):

Bill Joy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

These guys are not "light-weight" intellects, in fact they are some of the heaviest hitters in the history of UNIX, so what is easy and trivial for them might not be easy and trivial for mere mortals like us.

It's almost as bad as having Brian Kernighan and Dennis Ritchie (the guys who invented the C programming language) write up your final exam for C programming class in college or having Bjarne Stroustrup teaching your C++ class. Do you have any idea how nightmarishly difficult that could be?

To get a broader perspective on how "great" are/were those people you mentioned, grab the book "Unix Haters' Handbook" which is a free ebook.