Little bit of research

[arb culture]

Ooo, I've just noticed I've been promoted to 'Senior member'.

 

Sorry for going off topic.

[Amelanchier]

Tony, I've done it and found it really interesting.

 

Having been through the process I reckon that if a contractor has this badge, it shows that they probably will understand my recommendations as a consultant, and because of the CEU/time lapse aspect, I can be fairly confident that their knowledge will be reasonably up to date.

 

Also, Joe Public seem to respond well to the 'Certified Arborist' badge.

 

And having done it myself, it shouldn't be a level 2, it's a lot harder than GCSE's.

 

Thanks for your response. I think your quite right about the CPD requirement, its a major strength and really sets the qualification in a league of its own IMO regardless of its level.

[Peter]

I think its a good scheme in almost every way, however it isnt promoted over here like it is in the US, if there was a big push on public awareness from the ISA, promoting it to the domestic and commercial sectors as a hallmark of a good contractor, then I would get on it tomorrow.

[Bundle 2]

Thanks for your response. I think your quite right about the CPD requirement, its a major strength and really sets the qualification in a league of its own IMO regardless of its level.

 

I have not done it. I did not feel that after two NCH qualifications that it was right for me. I would definitely agree with the CPD's being a singular strength of the scheme and for this reason find myself reconsidering this decision from time to time. Not least because of the total stall beset potential students in other areas frankly.

However, and again, regardless of level, the NCH is regarded as a level 2 qualification. It was a 9-5, 5 days a week qual when I did it ( 1 yr) and the ISA just did not seem hard enough.

I am surprised to hear so many say it is hard and that it should be above this or that...but hey. Fair punt guys, I have not done it. I think you should at least be able to read and write to pass it however!! Im gonna show how out of touch I am but isnt it multiple choice?

[scotspine1]

I have not done it. I think you should at least be able to read and write to pass it however!! Im gonna show how out of touch I am but isnt it multiple choice?

 

It's strength lies in the fact it is multiple choice, this allows people who have a good knowledge of arboriculture but maybe dont have the required skills in written english to gain a qualification which displays their knowledge to potential employers or clients.

[john dawson]

im afraid my experiences of the isa in general is just not printable on here, as il get into bother from mr bullman. so im just not goin to get involved.....................

 

 

..................D'OH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Bundle 2]

It's strength lies in the fact it is multiple choice, this allows people who have a good knowledge of arboriculture but maybe dont have the required skills in written english to gain a qualification which displays their knowledge to potential employers or clients.

 

 

No argument from me.....Those of us without command of english as you say may well have qualifications of a different kind ( Craft level skills etc. )

Quite the opposite from discriminating against a whole sector of potential employees and Tree Care Professionals, these individuals should certainly be allowed to both gain credit for their knowledge and experience aswell have access to industry training and up to date education. All of which this scheme, IMO, provides to a degree. It is an excellent scheme that , damn it, appeals alot more than the rather "elitist" and discriminatory hierachal and tiered option the AA so far proffers....

None the less, what value is there in crediting a level beyond its "innate" potential Those of us who struggle to read and write are not likely to seek work in a job that requires an immediate grasp of the principles of reading and writing. It is precisely because of this that the value and importance of qualifications that recognises this group arises.

Just one last point however...and it is that I hastily add that I am in no way making the assertion that the ISA is intended for such individuals.

It is however, in my opinion and because of the obvious comparisons with the industry body in the uk ( AA ) not a program that can be easily or readily scored at a level with others in the uk. God knows the ABC is throwing it's toys out the pram trying to redefine Tech Cert, Prof Dip and others which I hope makes my point. The AA also moving quals according to incoherent criteria as far as I am concerned......Not theirs I know but this makes no difference in the real world Im afraid!

Multiple choice is a result of the difficulties of making the program accessible to a wider audience and increasing it's appeal. It is also the achilles heel.

[Amelanchier]

There are other benefits to a multiple choice based system.

 

• It works well with a stock question bank to ensure international consistency. I sat a PDArb exam not so long ago which had a scenario question based on an entirely different piece of the syllabus - examiners error.
   
  
• This consistency is also applied to the marking - its either answer B or it isn't. There's no borderline answers that different examiners score differently.
   
  
• Costs are kept down because the questions can be marked by computer.
  

 

Also I think its a fallacy to assume that becasue its multiple choice, its somehow easier. I thik this is based on the fact that you can guess the right answer 25% using random selection - I suspect that the pass thresholds are raised to the point where this tactic is self defeating. IIRC they're certainly higher than a standard GCSE paper (and lets not go down that road please!).

[Bundle 2]

"It works well with a stock question bank to ensure international consistency. I sat a PDArb exam not so long ago which had a scenario question based on an entirely different piece of the syllabus - examiners error."

So there's no examiners error?

 

"This consistency is also applied to the marking - its either answer B or it isn't. There's no borderline answers that different examiners score differently"

There's no examiners error.....

 

"Costs are kept down because the questions can be marked by computer.'

There's no examiner's error...!

 

Sorry but I dont agree with any of the above Tony. Theres a very good reason papers are not set in this style beyond a certain scope and timeframe scenario in other level exams I am sure. It not only limits the scope to which you can enquire of students but it also limits the scope within which people are different and able to bring challenging and novel answers to the same questions.

I applaud the goal of consistency, and that of enquiring of a syllabus that has been delivered with certainty and purpose....but to limit is to lose and multiple choice has certainly some very obvious limits.

I suppose we disagree.....

And yes, I do think its easier!

[Amelanchier]

I don't agree either - but then did I say there was no examiners error?

 

Regarding the use of multiple choice in similar level exams... http://store.aqa.org.uk/news/pdf/GCSESCIENCE230606.PDF

 

In the states, tests like these will determine whether you get into college / medical school / engineering college etc. They have their pitfalls as do all assessment methods but they are good at what they do - large numbers and low level skills.

 

And just for the sake of comedy, please give me a novel and challenging answer to the following question; "Under which section of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 do you notify the LPA for tree works..."