LETTERS
TO THE EDITOR
Recertification-by
examination
or by CEU?
To the Editor: What has happened to the democratic process? Doesn’t anyone believe in majority opinion anymore? Is the Certification Board of Infection Control (CBIC) just another bureaucracy that has blessed itself with autonomy (the tail wagging the dog) not to answer to the creators of the Association for Practitioners in Infection Control (APIC)? Information received in surveys from the 1980s produced results used in preparation of the certification examination. More recently, surveys in 1988 produced results to show that recertification by examination was not acceptable. Results showed overwhelmingly that recertification by earned continuing education units (CEUs) was the method of choice. This result was ignored. Why? I would like to see the following information published: Number of Number of Number of fication by Number of certification
national APIC members members certified members that have opted for recertiexamination members that have not opted for re(deadline already passed)
As much as I agree with job competency, I disagree with examination as the measures of such abilities, especially when that measure is a nonfunctional entity. Job performance, employee evaluation, and consumer satisfaction determines the need for increasing knowledge, not a cram for exam every five years. If one is not motivated to update information, knowledge, and skills, a cram exam is the perfect hiding place, and cost is not a factor. However, if one is motivated, it is an expensive venture and a cram exam is just another added expense that has no value except to print “CIC” after all the other initials. Therefore I say, “Recertification-hogwash and tiddly-winks.” BS, MEd, MS, MPH, DPH, CIC Microbiologist Pottstown Memorial Medical Center Pottstown, PA 19464-5006 C. Ross McFarland,
Reply I appreciate Mr. McFarland’s to offer some explanations.
comments
and hope
Role differences between professional and certification agencies. The primary responsibility of a professional organization such as the APIC is to respond to the needs of its professionals. The primary
222
responsibility of a certification organization such as the CBIC is to assure and measure competency of professionals. Adherence to national guidelines. In 1981 the APIC decided that infection control practitioners (ICPs) would benefit from a certification process. Although CBIC was established by the APIC, it must be, and is, a separate entity structured according to the guidelines of the National Organization for Competency Assurance (NOCA). The CBIC must adhere to nationally established guidelines, not professional preference, to provide a legitimate and recognized certification process. The NOCA guidelines specify continued competency assurance, that is, recertification and strongly support recertification by examination rather than by continuing education. Therefore, if the CBIC uses continuing education in the certification process, the CBIC and NOCA must be satisfied that ICP competency is assured and measurable.
The role of continuing education in recertification. The one small sample poll regarding ICP choice of recertification method was conducted by the APIC. However, the CBIC paid attention to the poll and recognizes that some ICPs want continuing education to be part of the certification process. Indeed, the CBIC also recognizes that some ICPs do not want to be recertified, but, according to national guidelines, this is not an option. Nevertheless, the CBIC has boldly taken several careful and complex steps to introduce continuing education into the certification process.
Course development and the Self-Improvement Program. The CBIC recently published its examination content outline (a very unusual practice for a certifying agency) so that courses can be developed to match knowledge needed to practice infection control. The new Self-Improvement Program allows recertifying ICPs who fail content areas of the examination to maintain certification status if they provide evidence of continuing education in these areas of deficiency.
Complexity of implementation of continuing education. Because of the problems of providing a fair, standardized certification process through continuing education that assures competency, many certifying agencies are moving away from recertification by continuing education. Before expanding the role of continuing education in the certification process, the CBIC must know the following: how course content relates to the core of knowledge, skills, and abilities required to practice infection control; which courses are recognized, available, and appropriate for a profession lacking a specific degree and core
TO THE EDITOR
Recertification-by
examination
or by CEU?
To the Editor: What has happened to the democratic process? Doesn’t anyone believe in majority opinion anymore? Is the Certification Board of Infection Control (CBIC) just another bureaucracy that has blessed itself with autonomy (the tail wagging the dog) not to answer to the creators of the Association for Practitioners in Infection Control (APIC)? Information received in surveys from the 1980s produced results used in preparation of the certification examination. More recently, surveys in 1988 produced results to show that recertification by examination was not acceptable. Results showed overwhelmingly that recertification by earned continuing education units (CEUs) was the method of choice. This result was ignored. Why? I would like to see the following information published: Number of Number of Number of fication by Number of certification
national APIC members members certified members that have opted for recertiexamination members that have not opted for re(deadline already passed)
As much as I agree with job competency, I disagree with examination as the measures of such abilities, especially when that measure is a nonfunctional entity. Job performance, employee evaluation, and consumer satisfaction determines the need for increasing knowledge, not a cram for exam every five years. If one is not motivated to update information, knowledge, and skills, a cram exam is the perfect hiding place, and cost is not a factor. However, if one is motivated, it is an expensive venture and a cram exam is just another added expense that has no value except to print “CIC” after all the other initials. Therefore I say, “Recertification-hogwash and tiddly-winks.” BS, MEd, MS, MPH, DPH, CIC Microbiologist Pottstown Memorial Medical Center Pottstown, PA 19464-5006 C. Ross McFarland,
Reply I appreciate Mr. McFarland’s to offer some explanations.
comments
and hope
Role differences between professional and certification agencies. The primary responsibility of a professional organization such as the APIC is to respond to the needs of its professionals. The primary
222
responsibility of a certification organization such as the CBIC is to assure and measure competency of professionals. Adherence to national guidelines. In 1981 the APIC decided that infection control practitioners (ICPs) would benefit from a certification process. Although CBIC was established by the APIC, it must be, and is, a separate entity structured according to the guidelines of the National Organization for Competency Assurance (NOCA). The CBIC must adhere to nationally established guidelines, not professional preference, to provide a legitimate and recognized certification process. The NOCA guidelines specify continued competency assurance, that is, recertification and strongly support recertification by examination rather than by continuing education. Therefore, if the CBIC uses continuing education in the certification process, the CBIC and NOCA must be satisfied that ICP competency is assured and measurable.
The role of continuing education in recertification. The one small sample poll regarding ICP choice of recertification method was conducted by the APIC. However, the CBIC paid attention to the poll and recognizes that some ICPs want continuing education to be part of the certification process. Indeed, the CBIC also recognizes that some ICPs do not want to be recertified, but, according to national guidelines, this is not an option. Nevertheless, the CBIC has boldly taken several careful and complex steps to introduce continuing education into the certification process.
Course development and the Self-Improvement Program. The CBIC recently published its examination content outline (a very unusual practice for a certifying agency) so that courses can be developed to match knowledge needed to practice infection control. The new Self-Improvement Program allows recertifying ICPs who fail content areas of the examination to maintain certification status if they provide evidence of continuing education in these areas of deficiency.
Complexity of implementation of continuing education. Because of the problems of providing a fair, standardized certification process through continuing education that assures competency, many certifying agencies are moving away from recertification by continuing education. Before expanding the role of continuing education in the certification process, the CBIC must know the following: how course content relates to the core of knowledge, skills, and abilities required to practice infection control; which courses are recognized, available, and appropriate for a profession lacking a specific degree and core
