I find the two definitions that come up for “qualified” to be somewhat ironic: 1) officially recognized as being trained to perform a particular job; certified, 2) not complete or absolute; limited. I do not disagree at all. My grandmother used to say of seminary that it “ruined some of the best preachers.” She’d call it “cemetery.” I have often told people that I don’t look for certification in a potential teacher; I look for people who are born teachers… people who cannot ignore the “teachable moment.” It’s not enough to be “certified”; if not born a teacher, the certification does not make up for the fact that this person is “limited.”
Don’t get me wrong: I do believe there are safety issues that are addressed with qualification standards. I’m not questioning the need for qualifying for a position or title. I’m questioning the standards by which one is “qualified.” That piece of paper saying the professional in front of me is qualified doesn’t mean a hill of beans to me if he doesn’t have the common sense God gave a goose! And therein lies a great conundrum: what would be sufficient qualification?
1) Knowledge? Not just knowing a set of facts (Common Core) and being able to recall them for a college entrance exam, that’s for sure. Knowledge, to me, requires apprenticing. We get much better results when we train a person from within a given field as opposed to outside of it. I personally believe that’s why so many choose to go into the business a parent was in… it was sort of an apprenticeship.
2) Results? Before I will book a hotel or order a product or go to a movie or use a particular doctor or dentist or realtor, I always read the reviews and seek referrals. I then have the choice to use or buy or watch or visit. Where are the reviews for teachers? Where is the choice? Hmmm. Instead, we hang everything on test results, and we wonder why so many teach to the tests. They’re very jobs hang on the results. I don’t blame any teacher who does so, but I also do not consider them “qualified” teachers.
3) A test score? How long has it been since you’ve taken a “qualification” test? You have the test required to get a driver’s license. I passed the test and entered the pool of licensed drivers. After not one, but two wrecks in the first three years, could I be called a “qualified driver”? (Only one was my fault, but that’s one more than I should have had!) Some people are really good test takers. I am not one of these people. I especially hate the ones that ask you to choose the answer that best fits the situation. In the practice tests, I actually verbally disagree with the published answers. I have justifications for why I chose a different answer as “best.” My father wisely told me not to put what I think, but instead put what a team of professionals in the field for which I am testing would pick because they made the test. So, even though I may not agree, I try to answer like they would. If I pass the test – not agreeing, mind you – am I then “qualified”?
None of these alone can prove “qualification.” Even combined, they do not guarantee it. We are left to this: only time will tell if someone is “qualified.” If your doctor has helped you avoid dangerous conditions, then he/she is qualified to advise you medically. If students of a particular teacher go on to great schools and become wise in their fields, then that teacher is qualified. Who is the judge? You are. Just as “an audience” is the only thing needed to be considered an artist, a group of people who believe one produces good results in his/her given field is my standard for the title “qualified.” Hopefully they’ve written reviews so we can all benefit!
- Michelle