So if I were hiring for a university, I would not use the RPT as a sorting riterion. And, given the ambiguity of its meaning, I would probably use the resence of the RPT as an indication that the candidate was involved in his rofessional association (works and plays well with others) rather than a clear ndication of technical skill level. Dorie With all due respect to your earned degrees, I disagree with your assessment. Being a member of the PTG is an indication that the candidate is involved with a professional organization. But being an RPT does require knowing a certain set of technical skills. Wim -----Original Message----- From: Dorrie Bell <dabell58 at earthlink.net> To: caut <caut at ptg.org> Sent: Mon, Jul 26, 2010 6:46 am Subject: Re: [CAUT] Workload; was Position announcement Following up on Diane's point: There are actually a couple of models for professional "certification," neither f which is followed by PTG/RPT. One, which does involve the government, is the licensed professional. Like iane, I have to document 15 hours of study every two years to keep my R.N. icense active. (This is a public safety issue so it involves the government.) The second, which is not governmental, is the academic degree. I have a Ph.D., ut no one would ever think of hiring me in that scientific field without inding out when I got the thing. Ph.D.(1987) gives a really clear picture: the andidate demonstrated excellence in problem-solving 23 years ago. So maybe she s capable and knowledgeable still, but maybe not. (This question is not a ublic safety issue and there is no need for regulation outside of the rofessional area.) It startled me when I first joined the PTG 10 years ago that there is great nsistence on getting and having the RPT status but no insistence at all on ither required continuing education or statement of date RPT was earned (the atter being especially important because not only to people and abilities hange over the years, the tests themselves have changed over the years, so the qualifications" of any individual are very unclear). So if I were hiring for a university, I would not use the RPT as a sorting riterion. And, given the ambiguity of its meaning, I would probably use the resence of the RPT as an indication that the candidate was involved in his rofessional association (works and plays well with others) rather than a clear ndication of technical skill level. I know, I know -- requiring recertification or continuing ed or mandatory dating f RPT would be a horrendous political mess. But think about it -- does our resent system serve the public the way that we say it does? Or does it serve ur egos? Best wishes from an associate member, with therefore no standing in this iscussion at all -- orrie Bell oston, MA ----Original Message----- From: Diane Hofstetter <dianepianotuner at msn.com> Sent: Jul 24, 2010 4:39 PM To: Ed Sutton <ed440 at mindspring.com>, College and University Technicians caut at ptg.org> Subject: Re: [CAUT] Workload; was Position announcement Something I've learned since becoming a licensed hearing instrument speciaist, s that, to keep my license, I am required to obtain at least 15 continuing ducation units per year. This is beneficial to everybody concerned. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20100726/fb35d655/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC