1 / 20

Pest Management & Licensing Approval Criteria for On-line CE Margie Lopez Read

Pest Management & Licensing Approval Criteria for On-line CE Margie Lopez Read. Points of Clarification. CE = recertification 3 rd party CE sponsors Annually 1700 courses Highly Critical Audience. Today’s Discussion. Value of On-Line CE Challenges with approval

lana-hoover
Download Presentation

Pest Management & Licensing Approval Criteria for On-line CE Margie Lopez Read

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Pest Management & Licensing Approval Criteria for On-line CE Margie Lopez Read

  2. Points of Clarification • CE = recertification • 3rd party CE sponsors • Annually 1700 courses • Highly Critical Audience

  3. Today’s Discussion • Value of On-Line CE • Challenges with approval • California’s approach • Solutions (we hope!)

  4. Value of On-Line CE • Feasible through technology • Popularity of On-line courses • Lower expense • Easy access • Sponsor flexibility

  5. Review Challenges Course comparisons • Variety of course formats • Fair and equal comparison Determining course hours Evaluating learning Accountability No ability to audit

  6. California’s Solution: Stakeholder Involvement

  7. Subcommittee Members • APCACAgricultural Pest Control Advisory Committee • CAPCACalifornia Association of Pest Control Advisors • PAPAPesticide Applicators Professional Association • UC IPMUC Integrated Pest Management • Sponsor Representatives • Public

  8. On-Line CE Format Styles Correspondence style: • Reproduction of written material • Text made available on-line Interactive and/or Narrated: • Controlled advance • Action required by trainee • Course includes audio file

  9. Consideration of Hours Word Count – 200 wpm Pro Works for text format Easy to measure Defensible Con Graphs, photos, other, not measured Language barriers Not workable for Interactive No assurance of learning

  10. Consideration of Hours Control Advancement Pro Indicates a time commitment Con Software expense No assurance of learning Not for Correspondence style

  11. Evaluate Learning Require Final Exam Pro ‘Validates’ learning Confirms attendance Con Possible to bypass text Potential to guess Not required for conferences Reduces time for new content

  12. Proposed Recommendations All Courses • Clearly stated objective • Operator ID validation • Final exam • ‘Shuffle’ feature • 70% passing

  13. Proposed Recommendations Correspondence Style Courses must: • Submit a print-out of the course • Limit no. of quiz questions • Date-stamp each course DPR evaluation will include: • Content • Word count: 200 wpm, 1 minute per question

  14. Proposed Recommendations Interactive Style Courses must: • Restrict fast advance • Describe hour determination DPR Evaluation will include: • Content • Confirmation of time required

  15. PROCESS OUTCOME • Can Implement Requirements • Improve Quality & Consistency • Stakeholder Buy-In • Defensible Rationale • Reduce Criticism

  16. Next steps…. Interim approvals Share ideas Explore National Standard Ongoing Process Evaluation

  17. Questions? California DPR CE List Serve: http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/dept/listserv/sub1113.htm California DPR CE Web site: http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/license/conted.htm Margie Lopez Read mread@cdpr.ca.gov

More Related