[optimal] Re: thinking cap
- From: CPMC Ophthalmic Diagnostic Center <cpmceyelab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Paula Morris" <paula.morris@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 13:11:38 -0800
OPS members have the option to become an Honorary Life Member, but lose
their voting rights in the process.
Denice Barsness, CRA, COMT, ROUB, FOPS
Ophthalmic Diagnostic Center
CPMC Department of Ophthalmology
2100 Webster Street Suite 212
(415) 600-3937 FAX (415) 600-6563
From: Paula Morris [mailto:paula.morris@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 1:05 PM
To: 'Ethan Priel'; CPMC Ophthalmic Diagnostic Center; 'Alan';
rhonsc@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: thinking cap
Hi Ethan
This issue has been debated by the BOC to infinity and back and the
conclusion has always been that to be meaningful as an accreditation, to
be maintained, it must be supported by CECs. Credentialing is different
from achieving a degree that is awarded by a university or school.
Credentialing speaks to current expertise - that is one reason why the
OPS has not "grandfathered" anyone with certification.
My recollection is that Csaba was one of the first to say that
grandfathering and recertification that is not earned by continuing
education was inappropriate. The honorary public recognition of service
and dedication is the FOPS which does not go away.
BTW, my husband's certification as an engineer goes away without
continuing education as well.
BethAnn can speak to all this much more eloquently than I. There may be
an official stance in NOCA - now ICE - that speaks to this issue, and if
so, that standard should be followed by the BOC.
My opinion, and I have both CRA certification and the FOPS, is that when
I am no longer imaging I will no longer want/need the CRA. I intend to
pursue the OCT-C as well, and may only image for the next few years, but
my overall feeling is the same.
Hope this helps,
p
From: Ethan Priel [mailto:prieleye@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 1:14 PM
To: Paula Morris; 'CPMC Ophthalmic Diagnostic Center'; 'Alan';
rhonsc@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: thinking cap
Folks, greetings.
I know this is not a formal or even ad-hoc group, but would like an
un-official sounding board:
I was struck by the 'strangeness' of Csaba mentioning in passing lately
that he is letting his CRA lapse, not needing it any more.
Do you think it would make any sense to 'allow' retiring CRAs, with,
say, at least 15 years of upholding their CRA, to 'keep' the title after
they retire and have no need - or funding- for maintaining the
certification ?
I know that the requirements will change as time goes on, but it is not
as if they will try to take jobs away from aspirants.
And the CRA must have been important enough for them to recertify for
all those years.
Passing this thought on to those who swim these waters better'n me,
Ethan
Other related posts:
