Re: The H. P. Profession

["Wesley M. Dunn" <WDUNN@brc1.tdh.state.tx.us>]

People have been questioning the exclusion of non-degreed 
candidates for the CHP exams (and a bunch of tangential 
discussions).

While I am not an officer of the AAHP, I believe readers of the 
CHP Corner, found in the HP Newsletter, will recall this was publicly 
discussed.  I'd further like to point out that this is the official 
publication for CHPs.  As such, each HPS member was provided with the 
exact same information that I was provided with.  I hate to be the 
one to say it, but there ain't no secret conspiracy going on. 

Since ya'll can look it up as well I can, I'll pass on my 
recollections (e.g., my memory may or may not be correct).  This has 
already been stated before, but maybe this will be a bit clearer:

The number of candidates for the ABHP examinations has exploded in 
the past few years.  Grading Part II of the examination, in 
particular, is an extremely time consuming process.  As such, the 
number of exam-takers was overwhelming the system.  At then-
current trends, no one would be able to take the exam because 
there would be no way to grade it.

The ABHP was required to take measures to ensure the process could 
continue without significantly diluting the quality of the exam or of 
the sucessful completion.  NOTE: I, personally, have no respect for 
anyone who seriously favors a process that waters down the CHP.  Note 
that I am not saying the exam or the process is perfect and couldn't 
use some help.  If you can't figure out the difference and want to be 
insulted, go whine someplace else.

Two of the recommendations were to (1) cut back on the number of 
reviewers for each question, thereby stretching resources; and (2) 
restrict the number of applicants to a more managable number.

The decision to require a degree was based on the facts (which is 
different from opinions) that there were a large number of candidates 
that were failing the exam.  In particular, those without degrees 
were failing is a much larger proportion than those with degrees.  As 
such, it was decided that the most effective way to reduce candidates 
was to exclude those without a degree.  This is not to say this was a 
good thing or a bad thing, but it was the most effective thing.  

I do not say whether or not I agree with the decision, but I can 
respect the reasons behind it.

Finally, I'd like to once again point out that, contrary to several 
mis-informed statements -- generally made by non-CHPs -- few CHPs feel 
that only CHPs are professional HPs.  After all, every CHP was a 
non-CHP the day before their exam results showed up.  And even if 
a few CHPs feel that way, it doesn't make them right.  So I'd like to 
see a little more professionalism and a bit less whining.  If you 
don't like it, just pass the "trivial, little" exam and fix the 
process from the inside.  For those without a degree, of course, it's 
a bit more difficult.  But could you not have taken it 2 years ago?

PS: I don't consider discussion of the issues to be "whining".  I 
consider all the "who are you to tell me" crap to be just that.

Wes
*********************************************************************
Wesley M. Dunn, CHP                        512-834-6688
Deputy Director, Licensing                 512-834-6690 (fax)
(Texas) Bureau of Radiation Control        wdunn@brc1.tdh.state.tx.us
*********************************************************************