And here I thought the degree requirement was just for turf protection.
Mark G. Hogue, CHP
mark.hogue@srs.gov
"But we surely overrate the usefulness of what we like to call "stimulation" and underrate the need for time, peace of mind, mature reflection." - Susan Haack
"DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily represent Westinghouse Savannah River Co. or the United States Department of Energy."
"Vincent King" <slavak@gj.net> Sent by: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
01/24/03 04:53 PM
Please respond to "Vincent King"
To: "Radsafe" <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
cc:
Subject: Re: Non-CHPs in the health physics job market - Opportunities are present
Certification is an indication that you have a met a prescribed level of both experience and formal education. Take away either requirement, and certification means something different than it does now. These requirements represent a consensus from a wide range of health physicists. If you are not certified, it doesn't mean you are no good, it just means you haven't jumped through a particular set of hoops that have been set up regarding experience and education. And lack of certification doesn't restrict you from good jobs if you work at finding them.
We can all probably come up with of examples of individuals who lack either formal education or experience and who don't understand what they are missing. There are PhDs who spend their entire working careers in academia and wouldn't know how to operate a survey meter (I've met some). There are also technicians who have been "swingin' a meter" for twenty years but can't write a grammatically correct paragraph or manipulate basic equations that are the basis for their occupation (I've met some of them, too). Individuals at both extremes have their place in the industry and can be useful contributors. Between the extremes, certification usually indicates a more balanced background comprised of both education and hands-on experience at more than a minimum level.
It is often the case that individuals without formal degrees don't see what the big deal is about the "piece of paper." Those who have completed a degree program see things from a different perspective, discovering that even some of those seemingly useless courses teach something (even if it's just how to survive a boring course with a passing grade). When I was seven, I could see where addition and subtraction could come in handy, but could not imagine a situation where I would ever need to apply division or multiplication in the real world. It turns out that I've used both a few times and that my teachers' insistence that I learn those skills was not just so I could be pretentious later in life. The same goes for formal education.
Finish a degree program before expounding to the rest of us how useless it is. When you've actually been through the program, then you can discuss its value, or lack thereof, from the perspective of someone who knows what they are talking about.
(I'm not responding to anyone in particular, just sounding off about the complaint that periodically arises about certification requirements. For those who don't like them the way they are, I have some bad news: my guess is they are not going to change dramatically in the near future.)