Re: Re[3]: Certification & improvement (longish)

Subject: Re: Re[3]: Certification & improvement (longish)
From: Bonni Graham <bonnig -at- IX -dot- NETCOM -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 1995 11:48:43 -0800

Tracy Boyington wrote:

>you were you think STC is planning to "grandfather" some?
>And if so, what would the criteria be?

Larry Kunz, who is on this list but currently on vacation, I believe,
would be a better one to give a definitive answer, since he's in charge
of the committee looking into it. That said, here's the feeling I get:
STC would rather not do anything about certification until they've
studied it a whole LOT more. I don't think they've even gotten to the
point of trying to decide about grandfathering or not.

If I had to recommend, I'd say that *if STC is in charge of certifying*
probably Fellows and Associate Fellows (although possibly not Honorary
Fellows, although why most of them would care escapes me since they're
usually not practitioners) could pass Go without collecting $200.
Further than that I don't really know.

Someone on this list pointed out the last time certification came up
(about a year ago -- and this is a much more fruitful discussion than
that one was, IMHO) that STC should maybe not be involved, other than
as an advisory body, since we could be interpreted as being biased to
members. Not a bad point. If we must have one, I think the certifying
body should be completely independent of anything other than itself,
except to get buy-in from organizations like STC, AMWA, WIC, etc.

IF we're going to certify, though, I think completely grandfathering it
defeats the purpose. However, experience should count for something.
Maybe X number of years in the field gets you out of the general test,
X number of years in a discipline (like on-line or multimedia) gets you
out of THAT test, X number of awards won from recognized bodies (see
above) gets you out of the portfolio review, a written report from a
usability testing firm gets you out of that portion, etc. Whatever
criteria we use, we should be cognizant of actual, real-world
experience as being a valid indicator of expertise.

Bonni Graham
Manual Labour
bonnig -at- ix -dot- netcom -dot- com

Previous by Author: Re: TW on the development team (long)
Next by Author: Resume
Previous by Thread: Re: Re[3]: Certification & improvement (longish)
Next by Thread: Re: Re[3]: Certification & improvement (longish)

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads