ACPE certification process experienced as "subjective and adversarial, without definable processes for advocacy and mentoring of candidates."
REPORT OF THE ACPE PRESIDENTIAL TASK GROUP ON TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION AUGUST, 2006
Regarding certification:
While our certifiers provide high quality and dedicated assessment, our standards for certification are open to subjective interpretation and often reflect differing understandings.
Dominant and emerging concepts in supervisory education lack articulation and uniform understanding.
The certification experience is sometimes surprising and painful and is occasionally perceived by candidates as failing to reflect the core values of our organization.
The presenter's report, while typically reflecting a high level of insight and skill on the part of the writer, remains a tool of arguable value that demands a great deal of work from one person.
At its best, the report clarifies and focuses the competencies being assessed, and yet it often tends to unintentionally create bias and can contribute to future misconceptions.
We do not have a process in place to assess the qualifications of supervisors to serve on the Certification Commission, many of whom have no experience providing supervisory education.
The certification process is often experienced as subjective and adversarial, without definable processes for advocacy and mentoring of candidates.
Current certification processes are not transparent and afford little opportunity for self-learning and process improvement.
The relationship between the Certification Commission, the Ethics Commission, and the Accreditation Commission regarding appeals, complaints, and competency issues is undefined and problematic.
No avenue exists for the certification subcommittee to coordinate further training with the training supervisor.
The "peer review" process in the ACPE is not structured to support the growth and development of our educating supervisors and no other processes have been formally identified.
The ACPE Presidential Task Group recommends that "supervisory education experience itself needs to move toward a collaborative, mentoring model that supports both personal integration and professional competency development."
Read The Full ACPE Presidential Task Group's report at:
http://www.acpe.edu/certification_news.htm
REPORT OF THE ACPE PRESIDENTIAL TASK GROUP ON TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION AUGUST, 2006
Regarding certification:
While our certifiers provide high quality and dedicated assessment, our standards for certification are open to subjective interpretation and often reflect differing understandings.
Dominant and emerging concepts in supervisory education lack articulation and uniform understanding.
The certification experience is sometimes surprising and painful and is occasionally perceived by candidates as failing to reflect the core values of our organization.
The presenter's report, while typically reflecting a high level of insight and skill on the part of the writer, remains a tool of arguable value that demands a great deal of work from one person.
At its best, the report clarifies and focuses the competencies being assessed, and yet it often tends to unintentionally create bias and can contribute to future misconceptions.
We do not have a process in place to assess the qualifications of supervisors to serve on the Certification Commission, many of whom have no experience providing supervisory education.
The certification process is often experienced as subjective and adversarial, without definable processes for advocacy and mentoring of candidates.
Current certification processes are not transparent and afford little opportunity for self-learning and process improvement.
The relationship between the Certification Commission, the Ethics Commission, and the Accreditation Commission regarding appeals, complaints, and competency issues is undefined and problematic.
No avenue exists for the certification subcommittee to coordinate further training with the training supervisor.
The "peer review" process in the ACPE is not structured to support the growth and development of our educating supervisors and no other processes have been formally identified.
The ACPE Presidential Task Group recommends that "supervisory education experience itself needs to move toward a collaborative, mentoring model that supports both personal integration and professional competency development."
Read The Full ACPE Presidential Task Group's report at:
http://www.acpe.edu/certification_news.htm