RE: HP Exam and Common Sense

["Fulmer, Philip" <FulmerP@ttnus.com>]

Having worked with Dick Bowers (who was given the task of overhauling
Part I in the late 1980s) for several years and having taught courses
with him, I wanted to share some insight on the Part I Exam and why
comparing it to the NRRPT is difficult.

First, the intended audience for NRRPT certification is different than
that for the CHP certification.  You need only read the requirements for
sitting for the CHP Part I and Part II test to see that you have to have
demonstrated professional-level experience beyond the technician level.
This does not automatically make CHPs better HPs than non-CHPs nor is it
cause for thinking that the NRRPT is inferior.  Both certifications are
solid certifications for their intended audience.

The Part I exam is not a HP theory exam; it's a "fundamentals" exam.
There will of course be some theory-type questions that are asked,
although the questions are generally asked in such a way as to avoid
having the candidate "parrot back" an answer.  Usually, any regulatory
type question is based on international standards because there are CHPs
in many countries throughout the world, and the international standards
are more universal than the United States regulations.  For us HPs in
the U.S., this requires extra study because we're used to dealing with
only our regulations.

  The Part I Exam will require more than a cursory knowledge of a wide
range of HP topics, primarily because the job task analysis that was
performed to set up the domains for the exam showed that HPs throughout
the country were performing a wide variety of tasks.  So the ideal
candidate for the Part I Exam is one who understands the fundamentals
and can adapt that understanding to a wide variety of situations (and
make educated guesses when necessary).  With 150 questions on the exam,
it is only natural that there be some questions that may not fit any
particular individual's work experience 100%, but adaptability is the
key.

Because of the years of data now collected on each Part I question in
the exam bank, the panel is able to construct a Part I exam of almost
identical difficulty each year.  Questions are weeded out from the test
bank based on their performance on the exam.  Questions that everyone
gets right are not useful in identifying well-prepared candidates, while
questions that everyone gets wrong serve no purpose either.

The Part II exam is, of course, designed to be aimed more at application
of the fundamentals tested in Part I; so the requirements for sitting
for the exam include more workplace experience than that required for
Part I. 

So so make a short story long, all this to say that conclusions based on
comparisons between the NRRPT and the Part I exam are limited.

Philip

________________________
Philip C. Fulmer, PhD, CHP
TetraTech NUS
900 Trail Ridge Road
Aiken, SC 29803
(803) 649-7963
fulmerp@ttnus.com


Previously asked...

Just curious.  Can those persons who took both the NRRPT and the Part I
CHP give
some comment on how they compare to one another?


************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html