Chuck-
Thanks for the lesson!  I was hoping you'd get online and sort this out!

I think this post, Kris Rhodes' and Julie Cole's might be worthy of printing out and retaining in a file for future reference for those of us that serve as mentors for young professionals in our emerging occupation.
-Jennifer

Jennifer Morgan Shambrook, MHA

Associate Chair for Research Administration
Co-Director Division of Public Psychiatry
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science
Medical University of South Carolina
67 President Street, Suite 504
Charleston, South Carolina  29425

voice:  843-792-0191
fax:  843-792-0048
email:  xxxxxx@musc.edu

>>> xxxxxx@VERIZON.NET 12/05/05 11:00PM >>>
Pam and the rest of the research administration community, I would
like to address Pam's and others' questions, answers and thoughts
about the CRA, the Certified Research Administrator designation.

I am speaking as Executive Director of RACC, and as having served for
six years on the Board of RACC.  I am copying the current members of
the Board and two past Board Chairs; if I am misleading in any way, I
am sure they will respond loudly!

Over many years the field of research administration grew into a
fairly recognizable profession.  However, many of the senior
practitioners of the profession realized that, in order to be really
recognized as a profession, there would have to be some criterion of
some level of adequate preparation and knowledgeability that many
individuals could point to as they tried to define themselves to
others as being prepared in the profession.   In the late '80's and
into the early 90's, a group of research administrators recognized as
senior in the field got together in the Society of Research
Administrators  --  some were then, or past, officers of SRA,
obviously not just people who called themselves research
administrators but without credentials!  --  to try to establish a
criterion.  This would be a certification, the bearer of which would
be a "Certified Research Administrator".

To make a long story short, these individuals determined that it
would not be appropriate for SRA, an association of individuals, and
one of two major associations in the profession, to undertake doing
this.  So a separate organization was created, the Research
Administrators Certification Council, which would not be an
organizations of individuals.  At the same time, starting in SRA and
moving over to RACC, a "Body of Knowledge" was defined which covered
the broad area that was, and is, research administration.  That body
of knowledge, with very few updates, is now on RACC's web site at
http://www.cra-cert.org/BodyOfKnowledge.htm.  SRA posts on its web
site a "Body of Knowledge" that relates directly to the RACC BOK, and
NCURA posts essentially the same thing as its "Topical Outline".

This group, the nascent and finally formal RACC Board of Directors,
decided that someone who might be considered a "journeyman" in our
"guild" would have to exhibit an adequate knowledge of this BOK.  But
research administrators are not psychometricians, so RACC engaged the
services of a professional testing organization, the Professional
Testing Corporation, to develop a test of this BOK.  PTC's web site
at http://www.ptcny.com/PTC/Clients.html indicates the range of
professional organizations for whom they do testing.  I have been
privileged, when on RACC's Board, to work with PTC in test
development, so I can speak to the process.  Potential questions are
gathered from as broad a set of sources as possible.  Board members
contribute them and we ask other CRA's to contribute them.  Each
question must be identified as relating to a specific point in the
BOK.  A group of CRA's, including a few Board members, work directly
with the President of PTC in "item review", in which the questions
are carefully reviewed to ensure no ambiguity about the one correct
and the three incorrect multiple choice answers for each.  So the
subject matter and the questions are generated by practicing, senior
research administrators.  However, their form is supervised by an
experienced psychometrician -- and let me tell you, she is really
good at spotting when a question or answer can be misinterpreted, so
each is massaged until it is good as we can get it.  At the same
time, the group tries to ensure that the level of difficulty of most
of the questions is at the "journeyman" level, while a smaller group
is at a little higher level.

Now remember, our profession is broad.  No one can be highly expert
across the board, but to be a CRA one has to know at least something
of other specialties within the field.  So a passing score on the CRA
exam cannot be achieved by someone whose entire area of knowledge is
tightly focused; RACC does not believe the CRA status is deserved by
someone who is overly narrow.  As I said, the goal is a "journeyman";
someone who can be dropped into the profession anywhere and function
adequately with only a little learning of the peculiarities of the
explicit environment, and will have the background to become good in
short order.

So as second step, PTC assembles an exam from the pool of approved
questions, and another group, almost all being members of the Board
of RACC, reviews and "tweaks" the exam under PTC's supervision to be
sure it covers everything, that a passing score will indicate at
least some knowledge across the entire field, and that strong
knowledge of some parts of the profession will also be needed to
ensure a score much higher than barely passing.  PTC works hard to
ensure the reliability of the test, depending on RACC to provide the
subject material.

In 1992 RACC surveyed the field of research administrators with
special requirements for "grandfathering" recognized members of the
profession.  The requirements included position history, time in the
profession, and statements by senior officials of their organizations
that they were both experienced and responsible.  About 100
individuals were grandfathered.  I have just looked over them in the
RACC database and have found that almost half are now "inactive", and
I personally recognize many of those as colleagues who are now
retired.  Since then each individual who has achieved the CRA
Certification has passed the CRA Exam.  The number of CRA's that have
been issued up to today is 736.

So, in answer to some of Pam's questions, RACC is the objective
credentialing body.  The organization exists for the sole purpose of
doing this credentialing.  The body of knowledge is both supported by
the two leading professional organizations of individual research
administrators and published for aspirant CRA's to see and for other
professional to critique or contribute to.

At this point in time, RACC believes that the mere fact that a great
many research administration position advertisements above entry
level jobs request or prefer the CRA indicates that RACC has
succeeded in establishing the CRA as truly a certification of
journeyman status in our profession.  The fact that HR offices are
recognizing the CRA as an objective certification of professionalism
which can result in salary rewards strengthens RACC's feeling that we
have established an objective and reliable standard.

And, of course, I must mention that this certification must be
renewed each five years.  The criteria for renewal are continued
practice of the profession, and significant efforts to stay current
in the profession signified by CEU's or other learning
situations.  And don't forget that any teaching one does in the
profession is even more valuable than attending a lecture -- one can
sleep in a lecture, but one must be awake and knowledgeable to teach!!

And RACC, and I personally, also look at Pam's final sentence, "The
CRA may be an important first step, but in my opinion it is unwise to
think that we have reached the end of the journey," as absolutely correct.

Now, is it possible that there can be some more advanced
certification in our complex and ever changing
profession?  Informally, some of us are wrestling with this.  But I
note that a CPA, or membership in a Bar, or an RN indicate that one
is a professional, and indication of greater, higher, deeper
professionalism comes in other ways.  But if any of you serious
thinkers out there can suggest a way to create an adequate and
meaningful higher level certification, please contact RACC.

Lee Folk pointed out something else important about the CRA --
studying for the exam makes one learn more about the other parts of
the profession.  And RACC has made the test that broad in part
because a good research administrator has to know something about the
other areas than the one worked in.  For example, if a preaward
specialist does not understand the fundamentals of post award
responsibilities, that person is likely to let something go out in a
proposal that will end up causing post award folks a headache.  A
preaward person doesn't have to know how to run an IRB, but at least
must know how to recognize that the IRB must see this proposal.

Also, RACC considers that a certain amount of higher education should
be expected for being certified as a professional, but we also
realize that experience can rightfully be substituted for
education.  Go to http://www.cra-cert.org/cert.htm, at
"Qualifications/Credentials:" for details.  There is no formal
position regarding a higher level of education than a Bachelors, but
anyone who thinks their more advanced education is a tradeoff for
experience, write xxxxxx@verizon.net to discuss it.  It seems
likely that a masters in accountancy certainly might be; it seems
unlikely that a Ph.D. in Art History would be.

And, as is clearly explicated above, I do disagree with my esteemed
colleague Dr. Miller that the CRA is not a valid and reliable measure.

I am proud that I have three CRA certificates on my wall.  They show
that I am qualified above the entry level in the profession, and that
I have maintained the qualification by continued experience and
study.  And, no, they don't tell more about my qualifications, though
many of you who know me may feel that they are higher than the CRA
demonstrates.

And Spanky, I know you can pass the CRA Exam standing on your head,
but since you missed the grandfathering date, you'll have to take the
test in order to use the title CRA.  But you certainly recognize that
the CRA means a person is not a neophyte, is not faking it using a
distorted job title for the previous position, and does know somethin'!

Chuck

At 12:35 PM 12/5/2005, you wrote:
>
>This is something that has been bothering me, and I have decided to
>share my concerns via this forum:  I recently noticed a research
>administration position announcement that required that persons
>applying for the job have CRA status or be willing to obtain this
>designation within a few years of employment.  In my opinion,
>requiring research administrators obtain a Certified Research
>Administrator (CRA) designation to obtain and maintain employment is
>very premature.
>
>The exam for the CRA tests an examinee's knowledge of particular
>body of knowledge and indicates that a high enough score on the test
>along with a certain number of years on the job and a bachelor's
>degree is sufficient for the individual to be "certified" as a
>research or grants administrator.  The unasked questions in this
>transaction are:  Who decides what the fundamental body of knowledge
>is in research administration?  The exam may indeed have captured
>the incredible diversity of this ever changing field, but how do we
>know?  Is there an objective credentialing body behind the CRA exam,
>such as the Committee on Accreditation (CoA) which oversees the
>accreditation of programs and exams in professional psychology for
>the American Psychological Association (APA)? Is there anything more
>rigorous than anecdotal evidence to support the validity of the exam?
>
>Assuming the CRA exam does capture all the fundamentals of research
>administration, are the questions good questions, i.e., do the
>questions really tap the individual's true understanding of this
>body of knowledge?  No test is perfect, and there are numerous
>factors that affect the reliability of a test, e.g., the length of
>the test, the way the items are constructed, and even the directions
>for taking the test.  Reliability is an essential characteristic of
>a good test, because if a test doesn't measure consistently
>(reliably), then one can not know if the scores resulting from a
>particular administration are due to the examinee's achievement or
>random error.  The CRA web site does not report test validity or
>reliability information, and these are important things to know
>before making someone's job dependent upon having or getting a CRA!
>
>Research administrators work hard, often without anyone noticing or
>appreciating the work being done. It therefore is very tempting to
>try and place research administration at the same table with other
>valued professions.  However, if one looks at what other professions
>have done and are doing to achieve this respected status, it is
>clear that we in research administration have a long way to go.  The
>CRA may be an important first step, but in my opinion it is unwise
>to think that we have reached the end of the journey.
>
>Pamela F. Miller, Ph.D.
>Director, Office of Sponsored Projects
>The University of San Francisco
>2130 Fulton Street
>San Francisco, CA 94117-1080
>TEL  415-422-5368

>FAX 415-422-6222
>EMAIL <mailto:xxxxxx@usfca.edu>xxxxxx@usfca.edu
>
>
>======================================================================
>Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including
>subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available
>via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv
>Lists") ======================================================================

Herbert "Chuck" Chermside, CRA
Executive Director, Research Administrators Certification Council
PO BOX 72641, Towne Center Station
Richmond, VA 23235-8018
804-543-3002
xxxxxx@verizon.net
http://www.cra-cert.org/

======================================================================
 Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including
 subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available
 via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists")
======================================================================

======================================================================
 Instructions on how to use the RESADM-L Mailing List, including
 subscription information and a web-searchable archive, are available
 via our web site at http://www.hrinet.org (click on "Listserv Lists")
======================================================================