3 ms·

None of these can be tested by an online-proctored test necessitating the installation of a rootkit. The first two have specific government licensing requireme

None of these can be tested by an online-proctored test necessitating the installation of a rootkit. The first two have specific government licensing requirements that require in-person examinations in use of the equipment in question. The third has no need of any sort of proctored test. The fourth _may_ need some sort of proctored test, but most teaching licences require in-person or otherwise monitored practica—and those are far more viable than anything proctored. Teachers should _often_ be ready to turn to books, depending on what it is they are teaching. The fifth also doesn’t need a proctored test, and the type of immediate no-book knowledge required when preparing something is something that isn’t readily memorizable, but is instead only something that is achievable via long experience. Most chefs work from recipes and plans. I don’t think that any of the examples you have given fit the mold.

lostlogin 5y ago
I think you are underestimating the amount of regulation and qualification that is required for various roles. Health and safety, code compliance and best practice are tested and assessed for a vast number of professions where I am. Certainly teaching, driving, food safety, building etc. I struggle to think of a profession or trade that has no testing or legal requirement for standards (and associated proof of compliance). Many companies require online training to get their own policies across. Probably a key detail - I’m in New Zealand, and Health and safety is taken increasingly seriously. Company directors face stiff fines/imprisonment for H&S failures and while things have a long way to go, they have also come a long way in a short time.
- halostatue 5y ago
  I’m in favour of (sane) licensing rules. I believe that a number of licences that are offered in many places are _too easy_ to get and need more training, ongoing training, and certification to maintain a licence. However, health and safety &c are mostly _orthogonal_ to the professional standards of the professions you listed—and in some cases (musician, teacher, and chef), are not the primary responsibility of the professional. (A tour manager / stage manager may have H&S responsibilities around a musician’s show, but musicians themselves have almost no such responsibilities.) Structural engineers need to know how to calculate the safety of what they are building, but they may (and probably _do_) need to look up the specific regulations and requirements for different localities or structures or materials quite regularly, unless they work on a single type of structure and material in a single location that never changes its regulatory requirements. Looking up the specifics to an answer isn’t a failure, and our training and certification regimes need to recognize that it isn’t a failure. If having split-second responses to a particular situation is required, then the training needs to focus on what is absolutely required and reflect that (much like military training does with respect to weapon safety).

lostlogin 5y ago

I think you are underestimating the amount of regulation and qualification that is required for various roles. Health and safety, code compliance and best practice are tested and assessed for a vast number of professions where I am. Certainly teaching, driving, food safety, building etc. I struggle to think of a profession or trade that has no testing or legal requirement for standards (and associated proof of compliance). Many companies require online training to get their own policies across. Probably a key detail - I’m in New Zealand, and Health and safety is taken increasingly seriously. Company directors face stiff fines/imprisonment for H&S failures and while things have a long way to go, they have also come a long way in a short time.

halostatue 5y ago
I’m in favour of (sane) licensing rules. I believe that a number of licences that are offered in many places are _too easy_ to get and need more training, ongoing training, and certification to maintain a licence. However, health and safety &c are mostly _orthogonal_ to the professional standards of the professions you listed—and in some cases (musician, teacher, and chef), are not the primary responsibility of the professional. (A tour manager / stage manager may have H&S responsibilities around a musician’s show, but musicians themselves have almost no such responsibilities.) Structural engineers need to know how to calculate the safety of what they are building, but they may (and probably _do_) need to look up the specific regulations and requirements for different localities or structures or materials quite regularly, unless they work on a single type of structure and material in a single location that never changes its regulatory requirements. Looking up the specifics to an answer isn’t a failure, and our training and certification regimes need to recognize that it isn’t a failure. If having split-second responses to a particular situation is required, then the training needs to focus on what is absolutely required and reflect that (much like military training does with respect to weapon safety).