Re: The H. P. Profession

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

Actually, if I understand correctly the motivations, the primary 
motivation was to prevent the system from failing under its own 
weight.  As such, the decision would not be to reduce the number 
of test takers, but to reduce the number of unqualified test takers. 
A slightly different emphasis. 

I'm sure ABHP would love to have the many extra unpaid volunteers to 
spend the considerable amount of time to help grade the exams.  But, 
as Carol Berger pointed out, this is not a trivial process (either 
finding that many more volunteers OR actually grading the exam).  

Given that infinite resources are not available, one must do what one 
can to resolve the issue in the least unpleasant manner.  I'm sure 
many of us can recognize the issues related to that.

Wes


> Date sent:      Fri, 12 Sep 97 15:33:48 -0500
> Send reply to:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> From:           "David W. Lee" <lee_david_w@lanl.gov>
> To:             Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
> Subject:        Re: The H. P. Profession 

>     So if I understand Wes' reply correctly, the AAHP was driven by expediency
> to reduce the number of Part II test takers.  The way the AAHP chose to do
> this was not by increasing the number of question reviewers/test graders,
> but rather by imposing the Bachelor degree requirement.  Interesting that
> expediency was the primary driver rather than a more philosophical
> consideration of the merits/demerits of requiring a degree.
> 
> Regards  David 
> 
> 

*********************************************************************
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
*********************************************************************