It’s still a point of contention whether this would actually work, and Jon Henshaw did a nice job today of talking about why he would not be for industry certification: http://raventools.com/blog/seo-certification-is-stupid/

This certainly isn’t the same as general training, and I definitely don’t agree with the vigilante activity that tends to go on in the SEO world regarding things that the loudest community members don’t like, even if they are in the right. However, in the years since I wrote this post, I’ve competed in some very difficult markets for rankings. There is no way that companies trying to rank for terms like [poker] or [insurance] would see fit to adhere to rules defined in their licenses. They’d likely do themselves a disservice if they did.

SEO is very different to plumbing, and norms apply to both industries that don’t apply to the other. I don’t think you can compare them when deciding what should be licensed. And as Jon says in his piece, “People are going to do stupid things, regardless of whether or not they are certified.”

It’s why we have licensed plumbers and electricians.

We should probably have licensed SEO people.

As far as time and money go, I’m more than happy to teach that class if it means the entire SEO community will enable them to place their energy into other SEO practices.

Also, maybe SEO shouldn’t be centered around web developers, maybe it should centered around writers?

I mean, they don’t teach lawyers how to win cases or anything – they teach them how to understand and interpret the law and the like. It’s not an exact how-to guide but more of teaching the skills which will be brought to bear in a situation.

So really could not SEO be “taught” through simply understanding how and why and whatnot and leave the actual learning to the first appointment after graduation?

Or should I stop watching reruns of “Legally Blonde” on TV…?

Especially in such a money-driven industry as SEO, which means the only teachers will be failed/crap SEOs.