Linda,
		I agree with you but ....

Experience in a lab can be valuable or less than valuable depending on the
lab, the supervisor and the type of work. Some labs are so specialized that
20 or more years experience may in reality be one years experience repeated
20 times or in another lab it may be a really valuable training wher the
histotech is able to continually expand their knowledge and skills. If it
takes say 1-2 years to be able to cut thick EM sections that are excellent
how much more skilled will be this individual be after 5 years, 10 years etc.?
Histotechs have diverse experiences depending on the lab. There are a few
attempts to standardize training standardization, one being the ASCP and
the other the CEU courses offered by NSH and state organizations.
The requirement for an associate degree is another attempt at
standardization and I would support it. True it it might not necessarily
make you personally a better technician but for many it would. The best
benefit of this requirement is that it offers a better degree of
standardization than we currently possess and our histotech organizations
will have more political power with the state legislatures. Hopefully this
will result in some improvement in both salaries and working conditions.
Barry

At 12:46 AM 4/30/99 EDT, you wrote:
>That's absurd.  What makes an Associate Degree so important?  I've been
doing 
>histology for 20 years without that piece of paper...and a darned good job, 
>too.  
>
>What makes people think that a 2 year degree, a 4 year degree or even an 
>master's degree can make a skilled employee and a solid worker?  We've taken 
>the ASCP test and have proven ourselves.  That should be good enough.  Who's 
>great idea was it to diminish that by requiring a random number of college 
>credits?
>
>Linda Gephart
>All Saints Hospital
>Fort Worth, TX
>
>