I understand that the criteria for who can take a certification exam and who might pass that exam can be different, and I understand the legal reasoning behind the concept that everyone should at least be offered a chance to take the exam.
However, my concern is that the currently proposed model for certification seriously confuses and undermines the general understanding of what it means to be a recognized professional member of the professional trade organization known as AIC, by creating a basic membership category of “Certified Member”, which is open, (for legal reasons), to those who have not even gone through the process of becoming Professional Associate members, the established, peer-reviewed, voting core of our membership.
I see this as quite a significant flaw in the basic design, a flaw which will be difficult to later remedy if it turns out to cause more problems for AIC than it solves, since it arises from a compromise solution to a legal problem for us with this separate exam approach to certification in the first place. I don’t think we would otherwise choose to intentionally design a certification program for the professional conservators in AIC this way.
Because of this problem, I now find myself, like Paul, inclined toward the alternate solution of approaching the certification issue from the perspective of applying some of its basic elements to the strengthening of the existing professional membership categories in AIC. There are certainly a number of other ways to legally achieve similar goals and potential benefits for our profession by working within rather than confounding our existing membership structure.
-Mark van Gelder
Art Conservation Services of Austin
certification for conservators 