That was a wonderful summary and history of CRA... thank you! Karen A. Scheboth, MS, CRA Director, Office of Sponsored Programs CureSearch, National Childhood Cancer Foundation - 440 E.Huntington Drive, Suite 402 Arcadia, CA 91066-6012 Phone (626) 241-1681 Facsimile (626) 447-6359 xxxxxx@CureSearch.org -----Original Message----- From: Research Administration List [mailto:xxxxxx@hrinet.org] On Behalf Of Glenn Krell Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 1:07 PM To: xxxxxx@hrinet.org Subject: Re: [RESADM-L] CRA certification (and a tribute to the late Chuck Chermside) Hi RESADMr's, Always interesting to see the pros and cons of CRA certification discussed! (I would add that some employers will pay the testing fee and certification fee, and other employers do not.) One of the VERY best descriptions/discussions of the CRA I have ever seen is pasted below. It was written by the late Chuck Chermside in response to some thoughtful questions (also below) posted on RESADM. I hope no one will mind if I repost the late Mr. Chermside's contribution from December 2005, which was so good and so thorough I saved it on my computer (It's also available in the RESADM archives at www.hrinet.org . The late Mr. Chermside would most certainly have added to this group's recent discussion. He is very much missed. Best regards, Glenn ======================= Glenn Krell MPA, CRA Director, Research Compliance and Proposal Development Illinois Institute of Technology Main Building, Suite 301 3300 South Federal Street Chicago, Illinois 60616 312-567-7141 (voice) 312-567-7517 (fax) http://www.grad.iit.edu/research/ORCPD/orcpdhome.html Did you know? You can search IIT research expertise at: http://gradweb.iit.edu/gradresearch/searchengine.htm (begin paste of the late Chuck Chermside's post) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 23:00:05 -0500 Sender: Research Administration List From: Chuck Chermside Subject: All about the CRA 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 resident 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 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/ At 12:35 PM 12/5/2005, Pamela F. Miller 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") ====================================================================== ====================================================================== 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") ======================================================================
