I believe the real issue for quality Histologic Technician training is
the <bold>CURRICULUM/STANDARDS: what is learned and the effectiveness
of delivery.</bold> The mode of delivery can be varied yet equally
effective.  Some technicians who provide ON the JOB Training do a far
superior job to some formal accredited programs and some accredited
programs have a curriculum and teaching staff that is very effective
and hard to match in an on the job setting.  Some Learners are very
effective in searching out what is needed and developing strategies to
practice and retain skills.

I believe <bold>more emphasis should be placed on an effective way to
demonstrate standards of excellence to receive certification, like the
BOR EXAM written &practical (perhaps require an on the job observation
by certified professionals if needed).</bold> <bold>Those techs who
receive on the job training might be asked to submit evidence of 
learning such as a written outline of their curriculum, resources used,
a journal documenting hours spent in each area of histologic
technique.  This process would need to be spelled out before a person
began training so they know what to document and what to study, here by
creating more consistency in technician outcome regardless of mode of
education.</bold>

Stop focusing on whether one mode of education is better then another
this just limits the availability of avenues for learning.   Focus on
whether that avenue is covering the necessary content effectively. The
accreditation process for HT programs does not focus as much attention
to occupational content as I thought it would when going through the
process. More emphasis is placed on the building, at what kind of
institution the curriculum is being delivered, the amount of money the
program has to operate, the mechanics rather then the meat.  Perhaps
this is because I come from an educational background and in the State
of Michigan you have to document everything you're doing a gazillon
ways and show evidence that you can teach the same thing several
different ways.  It is expected that educators continue with
professional development.

Betsy Krummrey Davenport College-Ingham Intermediate Histologic
Technician Program 611 Hagadorn Rd Mason, Mi 48854

Rupe, Amanda wrote: 

<paraindent><param>left</param>

I think the OJT training is okay depending on the circumstances.  I
work for a large government lab and if we didn't train our own
histotechs we would never have enough workers.  We set up classroom
time for 3 months followed by hands-on in the lab.  We always encourage
and support our techs to get their certification and occasionally we
lose them after investing time and money.  When I started my training I
was a young mother(19) and wanted an education, but I was not able to
afford it at the time.  My job has encouraged me and paid for me to
further my education and now I am a Research Associate and my main
responsibility is training of our new technicians.  I will agree that
some don't understand the theory, but there are those of us who do and
we don't want to be ruled out because we were trained on the job. 
Sorry this is so lenghty. > -----Original Message----- > From: atbrooks
[SMTP:atbrooks@snet.net] > Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 1999 7:46 PM >
To:   histonet > Subject:      job training ...last resort > >     I
meant no offense with my statements about hiring unregistered > techs
to save money it was merely intended to illustrate where this > trend
could lead. >     I feel very strongly that on the job training should
be held off as > an ultimate last resort. We are after all dealing with
peoples lives. I > would want the very best care for my own biopsies,
and assume the same > for everyone else. >     It should also be said
that a few of the best techs I have met  were > trained on the job.
They eventually saw the usefulness of the > educational background and
fulfilled this in time. But they agree they > received result oriented
training, rather than quality oriented job > training. >

</paraindent>