What if there was no education?

[Homer]

In times past, the major place one could get ABO CEC's was by attending a state society or an OAA convention. Now that things like the Expo, Labortories, Frame suppliers, Internet, Magazines and many other sources of CEC's exist, what will be the reason for supporting ones state society or national organization?

I am not saying one should not support them, but if education is not their major reason to exist and education dries up as an income source, what do we see next as the major reasone for belonging and supporting and even existing?

[Judy Canty]

If you check the mission statements of most of the state and national organizations, you'll probably find that their primary mission is legislative. The education piece is there, in my opinion, to help generate the funds these organizations need to simply exist. Most Opticians won't affiliate with an organization unless they see some tangible evidence of positive legislative activity, i.e. "What have you done for ME lately?". This becomes a vicious cycle, Opticians who won't pay dues unless they see activity that can't happen without the funds the dues provide. That being said, I also believe that state and national organizations provide the framework for networking within our profession. That kind of communication is not just beneficial on a social level, but provides invaluable professional knowledge and information sharing. OAA, the Guild, NAO and the Opticians Association of Virginia have all provided me with an outstanding network of friends and colleagues, whose advice I can call upon and trust.

[Jo]

Judy, or any other party, what kind of a push do you think it would take to have mandatory associates degrees as a requirement to practice? I know some will argue the financial side; however, if you want it bad enough and you have an accredited institution near by you can get financial aid.

[This message has been edited by Jo (edited 03-14-2001).]

[hcjilson]

Dear All, I've followed the arguments for the associates degree for quite a while.There are many pros and cons, more of the former I think, and that will come particularly true as more time passes, in terms of recognition by other professions. It would be interesting to sample optiboarders to find out how the bulk of us entered this profession, either through education or apprenticeship.I became an optician through an apprenticeship but have a BBA.Having employed opticians who came in both ways I must honestly say one has no obvious advantage over the other.As far as CEC's are concerned, Judy hit it right on the head.They only serve Assn's and manufacturers,however I have always believed that any education is good education.Best from the Cape

[Judy Canty]

Opticians will get nowhere until we discover that there is strength in numbers. There are 65,000+ people who identify themselves as Opticians according the the Department of Labor. IF we could decide to support our national and state organizations with those kind of numbers, we would be a powerful force. Unfortunately for us, and of course fortunately for the other "O's", we allow personal agendas and stubborn independence to keep our forces divided.

[Jackie L]

Well said, Judy.

Jackie O

------------------

Still a Maina for now

[chip anderson]

Have you noticed how many state associations don't solicit the various factions of opticanry. Some for instances, some of which may be included or excluded in state groups. Independent optician, Physician employee opticians, optometric employee opticians, chain employee opticians, lab employees. No wonder we don't have strength, we know that if they are different from us they might have different interests and we couldn't get our agenda through. If we could agree on a common interest, pool our resources, etc. We would be a force. We might even get AMA ethical guidelines followed again and be wealthy independent opticians. Nah! Where would be the fun in not having excluded sub-groups to look down on.

Chip

[Homer]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Judy Canty:
The education piece is there, in my opinion, to help generate the funds these organizations need to simply exist.
___________________________________________

This is my point, Judy. What if education is not something that the State and National organizations can any longer depend on for an income source?

Is there another way we can get opticians to get into the same "building" at the same time.

I have been doing ABO Reviews for about 10 years. Now in my area there are at least two other alternatives, neither of which care to be associated with the State or National organizations.

While it is important that we give up our personal agendas to belong to / support an organization, is it not also true that the organization (state or national) must come down from it's ivory tower and find out what the average person - who calls themselves an optician, our potential customer - wants their organization to be .... for them.

It is the tendency of management to formulate ideas and goals that have nothing to do with what the workers want or need.

I'm not getting on your case, Judy. I am just using this as a way to ask questions that I think need to be asked.

Anybody else want to jump in here?

[Judy Canty]

I don't mean to sound flip, but this discussion is now being held on 2 forums and I just finished venting on the other one. That being said, perhaps the wants and needs of 90% of the Opticians in the US are ignored because, about 90% of the Opticians in the US are NOT members and have no voice anywhere. The only thing that seems to unite us at all is our willingness and ability to complain about the work being done by someone else.

[Homer]

Hey, Judy, lighten up a bit.;-)
Please indulge me. My intention was to talk about education as a funding source for state and national organizations. What if the education "tap" dries up. How will we meet the needs of potential members? What will their needs be?

I am not upset with you. While both you and I get tired of the cry-babies and fit-throwers (I'm going to take may marbles home and not play)the roll of leadership, in my not-always-so-humble-opinion, is to be a little more pastoral and a little less dictatorial.
Having been on boards in two states and president more than once. I see the changes. The bulk of the potential membership works for OD', MD's and Chains. A few years ago OAA "kicked out" the chains - - and a large group of opticians. My guess is that those people generally are not impressed with any of our political actions. Most hope that "somebody" will get a licensure bill through only so they can ask for more money! They have no desire to promote, improve and educate opticianry as a profession unless they can see that it will get them more take-home pay ...... soon.

We can't go out and tell opticians that they are the problem because they don't join our group. How motivating is that? We have to "waltz" them into the bedroom where it can be good for both of us.

Now, back to the question. If we loose the educational line of income, what will we do to survive and gain membership and pursue our political goals?

[Judy Canty]

I know you're not upset with me. Since I work alone, sometimes I just need to vent a little.
I really don't know if any trade or professional organization can exist without providing education or some other tangible product to it's members. It may be nothing more than a nice dinner, a good speaker, some awards to hand out and the promise of your name and picture in the paper.

[chip anderson]

We opticians did real well when there was little or not education, and we did an apprentice ship of several years or more in the lab before we became dispensers, and before the physicians became spectacle merchants.

[Homer]

So, Chip, ignorance is bliss?

And knowing stuff without bragging about it and having letters after our name ... both keeps us out of trouble and allows life to be good!

So the old days, really were good! I could go there in my mind .... If I could just remember where I filed all that stuff.

[chip anderson]

Homer: I didn't and don't think the apprentice trained dispenser was ignorant. I actually think that once you have made lenses in the lab and made contact lenses, etc. you have a much better understanding of what you are doing than any amount of class room training or CEC's can provide. When you grade on tests, you have courses that teach you to pass tests. When you grade on actual performance, you get performance.

When your teachers are selling something, you learn about what they are selling, when you have exposure to all lines and products (as in the lab) you learn what is really good or shoddy.

Chip

I admit that the lab trained optician will probably be weak on marketing and math, but the former may be a good thing and the latter can be learned or found when needed.

Note: After having said this you wouldn't believe the number of things spell check had to straighten me out on. Maybe I'm wrong.

[Homer]

Hey Chip, I agree with you!

I was saying that with a wink and my tongue in my cheek.

Keep up the good work!

[chip anderson]

How will licensing help when every bill I have ever seen exempts employees of optometrists and ophthalmologists? Maybe it might help a few incompetents (it might also kick out some very competent math~weak lab trained ones like I described previously) which may or may not be employees of chains. It will not make us better (just as attending all those damn sales pitches we call continuing education doesn't make us better) and it won't mean that the doctor's office employee will be better. The competitor with the first edge on the market still won't solder or do any of the skut we have to provide or work long hours, they don't have to compete.

Chip (dying for Judy's response) Anderson

[Judy Canty]

Chip, my response is in the General Discussion forum. I am weary of this endless bickering and am retiring from the fray. You don't see the need for education and licensure? Fine, go forth and prosper, secure in the knowledge that your barber, dental hygienist, auto mechanic, realtor, paralegal, police officer, firefighter and a host of other service professionals probably are formally educated and regulated.
Perhaps I'll be more inclined to continue these discussions over scotch and cigars in Anaheim.

[Homer]

Maybe what we need first is kind of union called the Eyewear Handlers of America. We then allow various specialties, such as Lab Techs (wholesale & retail), Design Techs, Adjustment / Fitting Techs ...............

The point is that all people who might come near to calling themselves an optician would be included.

What percent of eyewear is dispensed outside the MD, OD controlled environment? If you add national chains, what percentage is left to be dispensed by the "real" opticians? (You must understand I am not intending to be offensive here .... to anyone!)

Until there is an organization that will represent all eyewear handlers, we will remain divided. If I were an MD,OD or Chain executive, I would just let opticianry self destruct. Just look at what happened on the "future of opticianry" thread

[rfish777]

Just a thought but maybe we should include education plus apprenticeship. 28 years ago that's exactly what I had to do. My first employer said nice credentials with your state license but you have no experience in the real world. They would not allow any of there new people to deliver or order a new pair of glasses without it first being checked by some one who had at least 1 year of experience. And to tell you the truth I would not of had any other way. I have my degree and I was taught by some of those old pro's who knew optical inside and out. I do think education is valuable and without it optical will go nowhere because the other two O's will not recognize us without it.

[Alan W]

Change doesn't occur in the legislature.
Change occurs in the marketplace.
The public doesn't vote on using opticians.
The public buys its services.
Opticians are organizing to be recognized by politicians.
Opticians should organize to market their image and service.
Can't be done in the chambers.
Has to be done on the channels.

[Jim Magay]

Alan you are right on! The marketplace determines our value. If I may direct you all to a piece I wrote last year at http://www.opticourier.com/independentthoughts/all/2000/11november2000/index.htm I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Jim Magay

[Note: I edited this just to add a direct link to the site Jim mentions - Steve]

[This message has been edited by Steve Machol (edited 04-10-2001).]

[hcjilson]

Dear Jim-glad to see you contributing-
Some interesting points in that article but isn't that what OAA was trying to do when it absorbed the guild to begin with?They just haven't carried it far enough because the voices of the independents are not loud enough and they lack cohesiveness.I was, however, somewhat troubled by your statement "We could conceivably do away with the need for state-by-state licensing with its energy wasting
political corrosiveness" To what were you refering?
Best Wishes from your friend,

------------------
Harry J

[Jim Magay]

Hi Harry,
To put it simply, we need a "Super" license that would be accepted everywhere and would mean the same qualifications in every state. (Sort of a "Federal" license). We get easily picked off by politically sophisticated, well financed, anti licensing forces every time we use a small, weak, and innefectual state society to spearhead a licensing effort.This is getting us nowhere!

Jim

[Jo]

Jim,

A national license sounds like such an unreachable concept; however, the ABO and NCLE are national exams. How hard would it be to take those certification efforts one more step?

[Homer]

In another forum I said:

"I agree that we have been spending our time in legislative pursuits when we should have been building public consensus. There are not enough opticians in any state to really effect the outcome of an election but there are enough customers! Legislators are generally affected by polls and public opinion almost as much as they are by money.
If we took our political funds and aimed them at the public it might have more effect - IF we could agree on the message.

I fear, however, that the IF is so big that we might not get it done."

And in this forum Alan clearly stated:

"Change doesn't occur in the legislature.
Change occurs in the marketplace.
The public doesn't vote on using opticians.
The public buys its services.
Opticians are organizing to be recognized by politicians.
Opticians should organize to market their image and service.
Can't be done in the chambers.
Has to be done on the channels."

While licensure may make opticians feel better about themselves, our customers don't give a d... and our politicians are only worried about re-election and many buy their glasses at the grocery store.

I must say that we may be barking up the wrong tree - thar ain't no coon up thar!

I'm starting a new theread on "national licensing".

[hcjilson]

Good Luck Homer! With roughly 50% of the states not requiring ANY licensing you have a tough row to hoe! At this morning's board meeting, I read a letter from Tennesee looking for support to keep licensing in that state!Unfortunately the thing that we're getting VERY good at....is putting out fires :(

------------------
Harry J

[Homer]

Harry, isn't it that we are putting out political fires because we are up against two giants who for different reasons only agree on one thing; we don't want licenses for opticians?

Alan's point is that we should be selling the idea to the consumer instead of the the politicians.

[hcjilson]

I can't speak for the other states, but when Massachusetts was considering eliminating some boards of registration (opticians one of them), it began in Governor Weld's office as a cost saving initiative.It was not instituted by the chains.I agree with Alan in selling the idea to the consumer but that is out of our means at the present time,and for the foreseeable future.We should be concentrating on what we CAN do and using the framework we have available.Today I'm convinced its OAA,so I'm going to sign up on their website! :)
Best from the Cape

------------------
Harry J

[Homer]

Harry, what kinds of things did you have in mind when you made this statement in the above post?

"I agree with Alan in selling the idea to the consumer but that is out of our means at the present time,and for the foreseeable future."

Were you thinking of a nation public information campaign?

All states are looking for these little non-revenue-producing groups to be eliminated and with a little encouragement (or lack of objection) from other groups who find these boards inconvenient, it will come up again ..... and maybe soon due to a difficult economy.

richard

[Jo]

Harry,

I don't think selling ourselves to the consumer is that difficult. If you go to the ABO/NCLE website one of their suggestions is to put their logo in your shop, on you business cards and etc. If we could come up with a unified definition for "optician" and work amongst ourselves to get more folks nationally certified and into two year degree programs all we have to do is put up a sign in our stores and in our ads telling the public what that means.

Even my auto mechanic has a sign up in his garage stating that he is a certified service technician and stating what that means.

[This message has been edited by Jo (edited 04-12-2001).]

[hcjilson]

Alan, I meant that opticians lack the resources to educate consumers.Lets face it, you can have all the "wallpaper" there is to have and if the consumer doesn't know what it represents it really hasn't done its job.With all due respect to Jo, the only way to educate the public is through the media.For many years I had FNAO on my business cards.Not one person ever asked me what it was :( The sad truth is that the consumer is more interested in how long it will take to get the glasses, or how much they will cost, rather than the qualifications of the optician who does the work.Please don't shoot the messenger :)
I once suggested a general strike by all opticians.Just a week with no one to fabricate spectacles would go a long way in educating the consumer... :) :) of course you know THAT would never happen due to the competative nature of our beast.

------------------
Harry J

[Jo]

Harry,

OK, I follow you now. You are saying it would take one of those national industry ad campaigns like "You got milk?" or "Pork the Other White Meat?"

[Alan W]

Jo and Harry
I sat here posting a response to you both and it never got on. It was too long anyway. I hope this gets posted. The net is real busy right now and my ISP is shut down for Easter.
You both are dead on. Robt. Ogilvie (My recall on the name is questionable) in his book "Ogilvie on Advertising" (I hope I am quoting right here) told of the theory on spaced repetition. He briefly told of a closed door meeting of ad execs who agreed thatis something is told to the public 6 times it would be acted on as planned. That same statement was made in the lobby of the ad company's building in front of lay "suits" and the guy who said it was decked by a walker by. The messasge here is that our message has to be turned over to professionals. We should not take the message to the public without professional strategy. The "other white meat" was professionally conceived and delivered. Our job is to:
1, Decide on the philosophy/policy behind the message.
2, Fund our administrator who will work with the strategist.
3, Buy the strategist.

I move to make Steve Machol our adminstrator, go out for grants/contributions from the industry or whatever source we research and acquire, and getb a program in place. Now that sounds easier than it is. Because we haven't decided on anything. But based on what I see happening here, we are approaching something constructive. I contributed what I thought was a message. I encourage everyone to do the same, let Steve compile and presnt it for either discussion or vote and move forward.

I am thrilled to be in the presence of you folks who have entered into this discussion. Thank you Homer. Thank you Jo, Thank you Harry, my wife, my kids, the landlord, and my boss if around!

[optyx]

Being new to this board I just read these posts.
Is education important? Yes.
Is experience important? Yes.
Should there be licenses? Yes.
Can we make it happen? No.
The public can make it happen, but only if they know that it's needed. I've found that most people are shocked when they learn that here in Texas there is no regulation of opticianry. No. None. Get yourself a PD stick and call yourself an optician. They feel better when they learn that I am ABO and on the Texas Opticians Registry, and have worked in labs, for ODs and with MDs.

No one has paid me extra for being certified or registered, but if it makes the consumer feel more confident it's worth the trouble (and expense).

So, if we let the public know licensing is in their best interest they'll make it happen.

If your state and/or national organization started a campaign to educate the public an well as the optician would you support them?

I know I would.

------------------
Dan

[Steve Machol]

Welcome to OptiBoard Dan!

You're absolutely right. Unless the public puts a value on doing business with a licensed Optician, then things are not going to change. The key is to educate the public and the rest will follow from that.

------------------
http://optiboard.com/gifs/steve-sig.gif
OptiBoard Administrator

[Jo]

Optyx:

Yes, that is what I believe needs to happen. You said it, short and sweet.

[rfish777]

I found this article and thought it was interesting.


Archive » Business Management: Is Opticianry Education Important?


Is Opticianry Education Important?
This independent study indicates the public - your customers - thinks it is.
By Steven J. Gerardi, Ph.D

Whether or not opticians should be licensed is a battle being waged all over the country. Currently, more than half the states require some sort of licensure of opticians, and the debate over requiring licensure in the remaining states continues on.

Regardless of licensure statutes, a basic question hangs in each debate: Does the public-your patients-have more trust and respect in opticians who have attained certain levels of education?

The answer, according to a recent indendent study, is a resounding yes.

The study was conducted by Steven J. Gerardi, Ph.D., Thomas A. Woods, Debra R. White, and Roger S. Hill. It was funded by a grant from Essilor USA.

The study surveyed a sampling of eyecare patients about their feelings on education and skill level for their opticians. The vast majority of respondents-regardless of gender, economic level or education level-said they wanted their opticians to have post-high school education rather than apprenticeship.

Woods says he and Hill, an industry colleague, had first discussed "putting something out there regarding opticianry and education."

Worried that a study conducted about the optical industry by optical people would carry little credibility, they decided to bring in Gerardi, a Ph.D whose area of expertise is social stratification.

"We decided to do the study from a sociology standpoint," Woods explains, and take a scientific approach.

Once completed, the authors submitted the study to Educational Resources Information Clearinghouse (ERIC), where most educational studies are peer-reviewed. It passed the review, and will be published by ERIC this spring.

Next on the agenda was to bring the study before an optical body for review.

That, too, was a success.

The authors took the study to the National Federation of Opticianry Schools (NFOS) members, "for review by my peers."

The study was included in the December 1999 NFOS newsletter, and was critically lauded by Elliot R. Roth, vice president of the Federation. In his introduction to the study, Roth says that, "In regard to opticianry education, this might be just the wakeup call we need to begin to improve our condition."

Woods says the response to the study from the optical community has been a good one. "People are using to make a change" in the state of opticianry.

Gerardi told Eyecare Business that, coming from outside the optical industry, he was less surprised by the results of the study than he was by the current state of opticinary education itself.

"I, like most people, I suppose, was surprised to learn that the level of education necessary to be an optician varies so much from state to state," he says.

"I'm not surprised that people want opticians to be educated," he adds. "People we spoke with don't want high school grads playing with their eyes."

Time to Re-evaluate

In his introduction to the study in the NFOS newsletter, Roth mulled what can be done to improve opticianry.

"How has opticianry progressed in the past century? How do we improve it in the next?," he asks. "The century seems to be a pertinent frame of reference since the profession of optometry began its distinction from opticianry almost exactly a century ago. Since then, optometry has used education as a primary tool to establish licensure as well as diagnostic and therapeutic pharmaceutical certification in every state.

"This is in contrast to opticianry, which has not even been able to establish licensure in a majority of the states. It has been difficult to even establish ophthalmic dispensing programs in many of these states, and existing ones are threatened by politics, budgets, and low enrollment," Roth states.

He says one of the hurdles to increasing opticianry awareness is public ignorance of the profession. "Most clients are not clear as to what an optician is," he says. "Most people are befuddled on one end with ophthalmology, as evidenced by the requests of clients for cataract surgery in optical offices, and on the other with commercial chains that employ uncertified support staff who show frames and offer advice about coatings and materials."

Another problem is the lack of educational programs, he says, adding that the problem is a direct result of the previous obstacle-public ignorance about the profession.

"Without question, a heightened awareness by the general public about the technical capabilities, and quality care that can only be offered by eye professionals would result in a greater demand for trained practitioners," he states.

Finally, Roth says he sees the profession itself at fault. "Complacency has to figure into the equation. Opticians have seen changes occurring for the past several decades. The enhanced scope of practice of optometry, the mass sale of ready-made reading glasses, the birth and growth of mail-order contact lens distributors, and the minimal enforcement of license monitoring in optical establishments can all be counted in the injuries that have been inflicted upon the profession.," he says.

"The solution to our prolonged existence is basic. We must first educate the public about the benefits associated with dealing with qualified, licensed opticians," he concludes. "Through this, we need to create a demand for licensed opticianry in every state. Finally, we must establish formal education programs to educate all the opticians of America."

Education as Investment

Gerardi, Woods, White, and Hill created the study with the intent of measuring public attitude toward opticianry education as "human capital."

The theory of human capital suggests that, in addition to being a form of consumption, education is also a form of individually and socially productive investment.

In New York State, as well as some others, a high school graduate (or GED) can enroll in an apprentice program. This two-year program will allow he/she to sit for the license examination.

However, will the current optician training system, such as apprenticeships, be seen by the public as sufficient training for a health care professional?

Education is Better

The study asked the following questions: 1) Does the public think the apprenticeship program is sufficient training for an optician? 2) In the public's opinion is a college-educated optician a better health care professional? and 3) In the public's opinion, what level of education should an optician obtain?

To conduct the study, the authors surveyed a 10 percent random sampling totaling 151 customers of a large eyecare firm located in the United States. Responses were categorized according to a variety of factors, such as age of respondents, of respondents, economic and education level of respondents, etc.

Each person was asked the same set of questions:

Is apprenticeship sufficient training for an optician?

Should opticians be college educated?
Should opticians have at least an Associate's degree?
Should opticians have at least a Bachelor's degree?
Would a college-educated optician make a better health care professional?
Would you have more confidence in an optician's skills if he/she was college-educated?
The results (see charts) suggest that the customer attitude toward opticianry training is in favor of higher educational requirements and credentials, the authors state.

Indeed, the confidence level in the eyecare professional increases as the optician's educational achievement increases. Furthermore, these data suggest that 100 percent of those polled, income notwithstanding, would be more confident in the optician's skills if he/she was college educated.

Surprisingly, 81 percent of this sample were of the opinion that an optician should have earned at least a Bachelor's degree over an Associate's degree, suggesting that the optician apprenticeship program, in the public's opinion, is a relic of the past and is not appropriate for the modern health care professional, the study states.

Finally, according to the New York State Department of Education, the pass rate of the apprentice trainees within the optician licensure examination is poor. In 1996 only 47 percent-as opposed to 75 percent of those with an Associate's degree-passed the examination; in 1997, 69 percent of the trainees vs. 76 percent of those holding an Associate's degree had passed; and in 1998, 51 percent of the trainees vs. 77 percent of those who are college educated passed the New York State Licensure exam.

These data may be suggesting one or two following: 1) the apprenticeship program's training capacity is weak or 2) the students who seek such a program have poor academic skills.

In either case, the authors conclude, the apprenticeship program is not as efficient in training opticians as the college-based curricula, and therefore should be redressed. EB

Steven J. Gerardi, P.h.D., is associate professor of sociology at New York City Technical College of the City University of New. Thomas A. Woods, B.A., ABOC, is an instructor of ophthalmic dispensing at New York City Technical College. Debra R. White, MS.Ed., ABOM, Fclsa., is director, opticianry program, Mater Dei College. Roger S. Hill, M.A. is instructor at Tri-Service Opticians School. The research was funded by a grant from Essilor USA. All inquires into this research should be addressed to SGeradi223@hotmail.com






Subject Accessories Ask the Labs (Q & A) Business Management Contact Lenses Eye on Equipment (Q & A) Fix and Fit (Q & A) Frames/Fashion Interviews Kids/Teens Lens Processing Low Vision Managed Care Retail Strategies Spectacle Lenses Store Design and Layout Sunglasses
Author A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Issue April, 2001 March, 2001 February, 2001 January, 2001 December, 2000 November, 2000 October, 2000 September, 2000 August, 2000 July, 2000 June, 2000 May, 2000 April, 2000 March, 2000 February, 2000 January, 2000 December, 1999 November, 1999 October, 1999 September, 1999 August, 1999 July, 1999 June, 1999 May, 1999 April, 1999 March, 1999 February, 1999 January, 1999
Keywords








Copyright 1996-2001 Boucher Communications Inc. All Rights Reserved
Terms and Conditions of Service

[Steve Machol]

Excellent article rfish! Thanks for posting it.

------------------
http://optiboard.com/gifs/steve-sig.gif
OptiBoard Administrator

[Alan W]

So.....
What's next?

[Alan W]

I've looked at the postings of all of us over several weeks and several different headings. Much to my surprise, we actually have created solutions to many of the issues regarding the future of opticianry. It appears that we all agree that education and promotion of opticianry need to be brought to the marketplace. There is so much valuable discussion and debate already posted that we have to jump from one heading to another to catch the essence of it all. If we copied and pasted all of it into one header we'd have a startling amount of quality discussion and debate. Further, if we went from debate (which is going on right now as we speak on the Optiboard) to action we have already moved light years ahead than the conventional method of monthly meetings on the local level to yearly meetings that end up dead ending. Steve has already taken a consensus and brought it to a meeting. Obviously, that was a shock to the traditional way of doing things. What I see happening next is going to need some organizing on the net/Optiboard. But, what I feel happening next is funneling down the issues to workable action. So, here is a possibility of an organization plan after we have the consensus divided into action topics. Each action topic becomes a workgroup that can develop a net based plan of action. Workgroups can meet on the net in "hidden chat rooms" Steve can set up. Possible action topics are and not in order or prioritized:

1, agreement on specialties for certification
2, development of a training board to develope the criteria for a curriculum leading to a certificate of specialty (going backwards from the job to the training to create the job).
3, ways and means (working with each action team to determine its money needs, set up sources of funding (dues, donations, federal grants, affinity sources, etc interested in funding internet organizations)
4,marketing team who will interview and communicate with professionals in internet marketing and professionals in media marketing in order to get a budget and plan put together.

Finally, an executive chat room for team leaders to present progress on a regular basis with deadlines and accountability, open to viewing by all of us, but dialog limited to team leaders, possibility with general membership input at the end or something.

The hard part of this is to get used to the idea that not one foot touches the ground. It is all cyberorganized and managed. New rules, new cyberplaces, new everything. But, one thing I do know is that everyone in earshot of this posting already is internet savvy.Learning how to use chat rooms, Netmeeting, so on and so forth will be exciting, challenging, and very do-able, even if all the members are sitting there in their skivveys (sp?). It still gets done.

With all due respect. And the fact that you guys have heard much to much from my big mouth lately. I have copied and pasted this posting on another couple forums and headers in an effort to help facilitate organization. After this, I promise to keep my mouth shut and wait until called upon. I am commited to you all to help and hope I don't make myself a pain in the somethingorother in the process. Thanks for the opportunity to sub,it this crude and poorly constructed proposal.