Both ideas are simple and make good sense. I think listing the number of years certified is a strong reason I'd renew actually, otherwise what's the difference between someone who has been certified for 6 years vs. 6 months?
R. Walters r...@solarray.com Solar Engineer On Mar 14, 2010, at 12:11 AM, Allan Sindelar wrote: > Wrenches, > Recently I wrote to NABCEP with two requests, for changes on the website's > public information: > 1. In addition to a state-by-state list of certificants, have also a > single overall alphabetized list that is not delimited by state, to allow a > quick check if an installer who claims certification actually is so. > 2. I would like to see the year of initial certification available as > part of the published info on NABCEP's certificant listings. I would like to > think that this is also a good indicator of an installer's experience as the > field (of certificants) continues to get larger. > > I got thoughtful responses from Ezra and Bob-O. The essence of the > back-and-forth discussion follows my signature line. But straight and to the > point: Among those of you who are NABCEP Certified PV Installers, what are > your opinions about these two ideas? Any responses and discussion will make > its way back to NABCEP - I'll see to that. > Thanks, > Allan > -- > Allan Sindelar > al...@positiveenergysolar.com > NABCEP Certified Photovoltaic Installer > EE98J Journeyman Electrician > Positive Energy, Inc. > 3201 Calle Marie > Santa Fe, New Mexico 87507 > 505 424-1112 > www.positiveenergysolar.com > > [Last post first; earlier posts follow] > > Hi Allan, > As always it's great to "talk" with you. I want to correct a common > misunderstanding about the qualifications to sit for the NABCEP Installer > Exam. Nothing has changed with respect to experience. The person applying > still needs to have been the person responsible for two PV systems sometime > over the past two years. You are correct that some time ago we changed the > wording to "some time within the past two years" this was to indicate that > difference between two complete years of experience and two systems in the > past two years (our actual requirement). > > I can assure you that the likes of Bob-O keep us all very honest when it > comes to watering down the qualifications to sit for the exam. The entire > exam committee keeps their eye on not "dumbing down" the exam. They want the > new achievers to work as hard as you and the other early adopters did. > > I am not really in favour of the downloadable list because of the spam > concerns but I'll happily accede to what the "Certs" want. I'd suggest an > informal poll - RE Wrenches perhaps - trying to get some additional buy-in > from Certificants. Again that's your call. > > As to the date first Certified I don't think that should be too difficult but > I hate to make promises before I speak the the folks who would actually do > the work and find out from them how difficult or time consuming the task > would be. I'm going to be in our office later this week and I'll keep you > posted. > Best regards, > Ezra > > Ezra Auerbach > Executive Director > eauerb...@nabcep.org > North American Board of Certified Energy Practitioners (NABCEP) > 634 Plank Road > Clifton Park, N.Y. 12065 > 1 800 654 0021 > 1 518 670 4553 Direct > www.nabcep.org > > On 2010-03-01, at 9:01 PM, Allan Sindelar wrote: > Ezra, Bob-O, Tim, Rex, > Wow! I appreciate the dialogue that my suggestions engendered, and the fast > response. > > Re the first issue, the national list: like Bob-O, I did not see spam > potential as an issue, and I'm not knowledgeable enough about spam control to > advise. I have observed that I get far fewer spam messages in my inbox than I > did a few years ago - perhaps one or two a day, versus 15-20 maybe 4 years > ago, and I haven't changed either email addresses or public visibility. > > I would consider a national list to be a convenience more than a necessity. > You are all aware that I am quite protective of proper use of the logo and > any claims of certification - I have shared some of my efforts with you. But > I have seldom been hindered by having to check state lists, so it's not a big > deal for my needs - more a suggestion. Perhaps there are others for whom this > would make a bigger difference. > > On the other issue, I'll offer two perspectives, closely related. As NABCEP > certification becomes widespread and necessary for so many installations, you > are most likely experiencing ongoing pressure to certify more installers. I > have already seen the qualification standards become diminished - where an > applicant once needed to lead at least two installations to qualify, now he > or she need only show "experience installing PV systems occurring at some > point in the two (2) years prior to submitting an application". And > certification is certification, by which I mean that once certified, there > are no additional "master" or "graybeard" additional levels available. So > this becomes a very simple way to identify how many years an installer has > been certified to have the highest qualification level our industry offers. > > That's the objective perspective. The other is personal: I want to be > acknowledged as one of the original 44 (?) that passed the first exam. It's > an achievement I don't mind being available to those who care. And it will > matter more as the years go by. It's a very easy way to recognize the old > timers. It's also the way to recognize the people who saw enough value in the > fledgling NABCEP effort to take and pass the exam before it meant anything, > and with no idea what it would someday count for. > > Bob-O, re "I think perhaps we should also consider adding the year that the > Certification expires": to me that is a separate issue, and one of not much > concern. It's one, two, or three years away - big deal. You're either valid > or expired. But if you add expiration year, then also decide whether > Certificants who are expired disappear from the list or have "expired" and > the year next to their name, but remain on the list as once having been > Certified. Unimportant to me, just bouncing around ideas here. > > One more thing - I hate SurveyMonkey. It requires choosing one of the offered > answers, even if none of the choices fits. And you can't skip an unanswerable > question. Ugh! > > Does this help? > Allan > > > Ezra Auerbach wrote: I'll wait to hear back from Allan before we make any > changes - if in doubt kick the idea around with a few other installer Certs > informally and we'll use their responses to gauge if we need a full survey. > Work for you? > Ezra > > > On 2010-03-01, at 8:02 AM, Bob-O Schultze wrote: > The spam thing is something I hadn't considered. Clearly a trade-off. Adding > the year of initial certification would take some work, but it's a one-time > thing. IF we do that, I think perhaps we should also consider adding the year > that the Certification expires. That would be an ongoing chore, but perhaps > it could be automated by linked spreadsheets or something. > Allan, it's your suggestion. In light of Ezra's thoughts, do you still think > alphabetizing the Certificant's names on the website has more merit than the > potential anti-spam effect? Personally, I'm not sure the anti-spam thing is > that relevant as anyone can copy and paste the current list into another > document very easily, although state by state only. > Perhaps we should put this out to our Certs for a vote? Via a survey monkey > or ...? > Bob-O > > > On Mar 1, 2010, at 4:17 AM, Ezra Auerbach wrote: > Hi gents, > A couple of thoughts. I think we could add year of certification with undue > administrative burden-I will want to check with Tim-it will fall to him to > implement. > With respect to a list, we long ago decided against publishing a complete > listing to make it more difficult for spammers. > So, it's the Certificants call. Bob-O if you are totally good with the > potential of more list spamming it would be easy to post a list. > Tawk? > Ezra > Executive Director > NABCEP > > > On 2010-02-28, at 12:52 PM, Bob-O Schultze <bo...@electronconnection.com> > wrote: > Hiya Allen and All, > Both good ideas which I think we could -and should- implement, especially the > alphabetizing. > Ezra, I think a decision like this is way within your purview. Let's talk > about it. > Bob-O > _______________________________________________ > List sponsored by Home Power magazine > > List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org > > Options & settings: > http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org > > List-Archive: > http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org > > List rules & etiquette: > www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm > > Check out participant bios: > www.members.re-wrenches.org >
_______________________________________________ List sponsored by Home Power magazine List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Options & settings: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List rules & etiquette: www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm Check out participant bios: www.members.re-wrenches.org
