Re: ABHP Degree Requirement - Background and Perspective

[rkathren@tricity.wsu.edu (Ron L. Kathren)]

George --

Forgot to say that our thoughts obviously run in the same paths.  Always
knew you were clear thinking!  I see no problem, dilution or anything else
negative in you sending this out for a general posting.


Ron

At 10:26 PM 9/14/97 -0500, George J Vargo wrote:
>     DISCLAIMER:  These comments are my own and do not reflect an official 
>     position of the American Board of Health Physics, Battelle Memorial 
>     Institute, the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory or the U.S 
>     Department of Energy.
>     
>     Having seen enough discussion on the topic of the degree requirement 
>     for ABHP certification, I suppose it is time for me to respond to 
>     Charlie Willis and others and speak openly on this issue and hopefully 
>     shed some light on the thinking of the American Board of Health 
>     Physics.  Why did the ABHP do change its policy to require acceptable 
>     4 year degreed? IT WAS TIME!  It was time to reflect rising societal 
>     standards and the trend among other professional certification Boards.
>     
>     I am the ABHP member who made the motion to close the then existing 
>     loophole for certain non-degreed applicants seeking ABHP 
>     certification.  I did so feeling a responsibility to preserve the 
>     value of ABHP certification and elevate the status of the health 
>     physics profession in a climate of rising standards in the health and 
>     safety community.  I also recognized that this would not be popular, 
>     especially with those who would be affected by the policy change.  
>     Anyone who says it was to control the number of applicants, reduce 
>     grading workload, or any other reason is absolutely off base and 
>     completely misinformed.  Yes, the Board did consider the ethics of 
>     admitting candidates who had a low likelihood of success in passing 
>     the examination (i.e., those candidates with minimal academic 
>     qualifications.) In the end, however, it came down to an issue of 
>     maintaining the integrity of certification and elevating the status of 
>     the profession.
>     
>     After careful consideration by the ABHP, this policy change was also 
>     reviewed and approved by the American Academy of Health Physics' 
>     Executive Committee -- the elected representatives of the Academy.  
>     The change was well publicized and sufficient lead time (3 years) was 
>     given for those who might be affected by the change to take 
>     appropriate action toward obtaining certification.  There was no 
>     surprise here and I'm puzzled at comments that there was some 
>     subterfuge on the ABHP's part here.
>     
>     Is requiring an acceptable 4 year degree such an unreasonable step?  
>     Let's look at the evolution of other societal standards and 
>     expectations:
>     
>     Seventy five years ago it was perfectly acceptable for my grandmother, 
>     with a two year certificate from the state normal school, to become a 
>     school teacher and my grandfather, with less than a high school 
>     education to become superintendent of a power plant. Upon his 
>     retirement in 1962, he was replaced by a mechanical enginer with a 
>     four year degree.  Thirty five years ago, 4 years of education and 
>     training was adequate to become a pharmacist or architect and two 
>     years of instruction was adequate for an RN.  There were even two year 
>     degrees in fields such as mechanical engineering and it was even 
>     possible to get a PE license without any degree, given the right kind 
>     of documented experience under the supervision of a PE.
>     
>     The times have changed and society expects more of its professionals!  
>     Today, in most states a MA/MS/MEd is required for a permanent teaching 
>     certificate (some states still only require BS+30 semester hours 
>     post-graduate), in 1995 the entry level pharmacy degree changed from a 
>     five year BS Pharm to a six year Doctor of Pharmacy.  A BS degree is 
>     the norm for an RN license and a MSN is needed for upward mobility, 
>     although a few two year programs remain.  Try getting a PE without an 
>     ABET-accredited degree!  (It is possible in a few states in some 
>     limited specialties  such as safety engineering, but forget about it 
>     when it comes to the mainstream.)
>     
>     Let's look over the fence at our bretheren in industrial hygiene:  
>     over ten years ago they eliminated the loopholes in their program for 
>     admitting non-degreed applicants.  The ABIH has recently changed their 
>     requirements to a Masters degree in industrial hygiene From an  
>     accredited IH program as the entry level degree for certification. (At 
>     the same time as some in the health physics community are still 
>     arguing over the need for a 4 year degree as a minimum professional 
>     level credential!)
>     
>     If health physics is to grow and mature as a profession, then our 
>     professional standards need to reflect society's rising expectations.  
>     Several yars ago, at an AAHP Special Session, Paul Ziemer at an AAHP 
>     gave a presentation in which he cited several essential  
>     characteristics of a profession.  I'm paraphrasing a bit, but among 
>     these were high standards for entry, continuing education and 
>     development of its members, and active promotion of its membership as 
>     the primary or sole qualified practitioners of the profession.
>     
>     This opens the broader question of certification and what it 
>     represents.  Certification does not merely lie in the ability to pass 
>     an examination.  When the American Board of Health Physics certifies 
>     an individual in the practice of health physics, it does so based on 
>     an examination of the candidate's 1) education; 2) professional level 
>     experience; 3) demonstration of professional level work (i.e., the 
>     required Radiation Protection Report); and 4) professional level 
>     knowledge by means of a written examination.  Certification is a 
>     representation by the Board that the candidate has not only 
>     successfully met all of these standards, but also has subscribed to a 
>     set of Standards of Professional Responsibility.  In my mind, this 
>     places a great societal responsibility on the Board.  At the ame time, 
>     certification is a purely voluntary, non-governmental process.  The 
>     ABHP passes no judgement on those who do not apply for certification.
>     
>     There seems to be a lot of griping about elitism.  I would argue that
some 
>     measure of elitism is an essential characteristic of a profession.
There's 
>     a big difference between elitism and snobbery.  Webster's first
definition 
>     for elite is "the best or superior members of a society or group"  
>     Conversely, a snob is "1) one who is convinced of and flaunts one's 
>     social superiority; 2) one who despises one's inferiors and whose 
>     condescension arises from social or intellectual pretension."  Does 
>     the membership of the American Academy of Health Physics constitute an 
>     elite group? You bet it does!   Are there some snobs in our midst?  
>     Quite possibly, although none immediately come to mind.  Are there 
>     outstanding and superior members of the health physics profession who 
>     are not members of the Academy?  Certainly!  
>     
>     For those still arguing the degree issue, I think the question boils 
>     down to whether health physics is a trade or a profession.  A 
>     profession, to risk quoting Webster's one more time, is "a calling, 
>     requiring specialized knowledge and often long and intensive academic 
>     preparation."  Alternatively, a trade is "an occupation requiring 
>     manual or mechanical skill."  
>     
>     I believe it's time to get past this issue and look forward to more 
>     relevant problems such as the role of health physics in integrated 
>     safety management programs, promoting certification as an alternative 
>     to state licensure of health physicists, and other pressing issues.
>
>     George Vargo
>
>