-----Original Message-----
From: Louri Caldwell <louri_c@hotmail.com>
To: histonet@pathology.swmed.edu <histonet@pathology.swmed.edu>
Date: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 10:36 AM
Subject: BOR Registry - Clarification


>To clarify my opinion as stated in the previous e-mail, I am against the
>requirement of an AA for an HT - and I was trained by a graduate of a
>technical school (not a histology program or an Associates Degree
>Program)who had extensive on-the job training.  She also is the best tech
>I've ever worked with.
>
>However, I was only trying to understand the purpose behind the AA
>requirement, as I do not see how this "advances our profession" as the
>previous arguements have stated.
>
>First of all - you'll have no better control of the quality of training
>received unless you implement strict curriculum guidelines for the
>certification.   Also, you'll have no better influence over the quality of
>the more complicated procedures produced by labs because you'll still have
>those who are HT grads or who were grandfathered in performing those
>procedures that supposedly require the additional education put forth by
the
>BOR.  It just appears that the BOR is trying to "advance the profession"
>through artificial requirements that in the end do not mean much.
>
>Again, I do not feel that an HTL is required to perform those more
>complicated procedures - as I know many HT's that are high school grads
with
>OJT that understand it as fully as those who have a degree.
>
>I just feel that the AA requirement hurts a lot of very capable people from
>entering the field, and it's going to be even harder to recruit individuals
>to work.  There are not enough of us out there as it is.
>
>Louri
>_________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
>Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
>http://profiles.msn.com.
>
>