ASA’s Journey to Consider Accreditation Long
Mary Batcher, Ernst & Young
In March 2007, the ASA board approved the formation of the ad hoc Committee on Individual Accreditation to define the details of an
accreditation program, such as criteria for granting accreditation and the application process. This is one in a series of articles examining
such an accreditation program.
F
ormal recognition of applied statisti-
cal practice is offered by three statis-
tical societies—chartering by the
null
Will accreditation limit or enhance the field?
null
Royal Statistical Society (RSS) and accred-
itation by the Statistical Society of Canada
DC; Philadelphia; and Seattle. These cit- had degrees in fields other than statistics.
(SSC) and Statistical Society of Australia
ies were chosen because of their mix of The groups asked to participate included a
Inc. (SSAI). Although there are differences
ASA members in academia, government, mixture of university, private, and govern-
in the structure and complexity of the soci-
and private industry and for the diver- ment practitioners, with a mixture of those
eties’ programs, their accreditation deci-
sity of their universities and companies. working with more than 10 statisticians and
sions are based on a combination of pro-
Roundtable sessions also were conducted those working alone or in smaller groups.
fessional and academic credentials, an
at ENAR and JSM using similar questions
Results
applicant’s body of work and involvement
to those in the focus groups.
in the profession, and recommendations
A question about accreditation was The focus groups were informative
from experienced statisticians. They all
included in the series of surveys conducted and provided many ideas, which were
offer two levels of accreditation: a first level
by another of Scheuren’s task forces, the described in a paper by Mary K. Batcher
for less-experienced statisticians and a sec-
Task Force on Self-Awareness. The survey that was published in the 2006 JSM
ond level for senior statisticians.
question listed components of an accredi- Proceedings. Discussion here is limited
Longtime ASA members will recall
tation program as identified by the focus to the usefulness of accreditation to ASA
that the ASA explored certification several
groups and asked respondents to choose members. Focus group participants iden-
years ago, but decided not to offer a pro-
all they thought should be included in an tified a lack of understanding on the part
gram. However, with the recent successful
accreditation program, as well as provid- of both researchers in other fields and the
experiences of other statistical associations
ing an option to add any not listed. The general public about the role of statisti-
and increasing interest from members, the
task force also conducted an open meet- cians as a barrier to recognition of the
ASA is exploring whether an accreditation
ing at JSM to discuss accreditation with profession and noted the potential benefit
program would be a useful service to offer
interested members. of enhancing professional understanding
its members.
and recognition. They also said statisti-
Focus Groups
The ASA Task Force on Recognition
cians often work in teams with people
of the Professionalism of those in Business
The focus groups included 14 women and from other disciplines, and the statisti-
Practice was appointed by Fritz Scheuren
21 men with a range of experience and cal contribution is sometimes not recog-
during his tenure as ASA president in 2005
membership in the ASA. Experience and nized. Interestingly, all the focus groups
to take another look at accreditation or cer-
membership in the ASA were highly paral- placed some of the responsibility for the
tification of statisticians. The first step in
lel, with generally no more than a two-year lack of recognition on a lack of “soft
assessing the reasonableness of an accredita-
difference between joining the ASA and skills” among statisticians, referring to a
tion program for individual statisticians was
becoming a statistician. Recruited for par- general deficiency of verbal, written, and
to determine the interest of the membership
ticipation in each focus group were a few interpersonal skills. This was expanded by
and solicit ideas about how such a program
members with a limited amount of time some of the groups to a general inability
should look. To that end, focus groups were
with ASA membership. Also, there was a of statisticians to market themselves and
conducted in three cities—Washington,
small number of practicing statisticians who their contributions.
JULY 2008 AMSTAT NEWS 7
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80