[RE-wrenches] NABCEP website ideas

Fri Mar 19 07:24:46 PDT 2010

Allan - I think both tools could be very useful and fully support the
website modifications.

Andrew Truitt
NABCEP Certified PV Installer (ID# 032407-66)

On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 2:12 PM, R Ray Walters <ray at solarray.com> wrote:

> Both ideas are simple and make good sense. I think listing the number of
> years certified is a strong reason I'd renew actually, otherwise what's the
> difference between someone who has been certified for 6 years vs. 6 months?
>
>  R. Walters
> ray at solarray.com
> Solar Engineer
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 14, 2010, at 12:11 AM, Allan Sindelar wrote:
>
>  Wrenches,
> Recently I wrote to NABCEP with two requests, for changes on the website's
> public information:
>      1. In addition to a state-by-state list of certificants, have also a
> single overall alphabetized list that is not delimited by state, to allow a
> quick check if an installer who claims certification actually is so.
>      2. I would like to see the year of initial certification available as
> part of the published info on NABCEP's certificant listings. I would like to
> think that this is also a good indicator of an installer's experience as the
> field (of certificants) continues to get larger.
>
> I got thoughtful responses from Ezra and Bob-O. The essence of the
> back-and-forth discussion follows my signature line. But straight and to the
> point: Among those of you who are NABCEP Certified PV Installers, what are
> your opinions about these two ideas? Any responses and discussion will make
> its way back to NABCEP - I'll see to that.
> Thanks,
> Allan
> --
>
> *Allan** Sindelar*
> Allan at positiveenergysolar.com
> NABCEP Certified Photovoltaic Installer
> EE98J Journeyman Electrician
> *Positive Energy, Inc.*
> 3201 Calle Marie
> Santa Fe, New Mexico 87507
> *505 424-1112*
> www.positiveenergysolar.com
>
>
> [Last post first; earlier posts follow]
>
> Hi Allan,
> As always it's great to "talk" with you. I want to correct a common
> misunderstanding about the qualifications to sit for the NABCEP Installer
> Exam. Nothing has changed with respect to experience. The person applying
> still needs to have been the person responsible for two PV systems sometime
> over the past two years. You are correct that some time ago we changed the
> wording to "some time within the past two years" this was to indicate that
> difference between two complete years of experience and two systems in the
> past two years (our actual requirement).
>
>  I can assure you that the likes of Bob-O keep us all very honest when it
> comes to watering down the qualifications to sit for the exam. The entire
> exam committee keeps their eye on not "dumbing down" the exam. They want the
> new achievers to work as hard as you and the other early adopters did.
>
>  I am not really in favour of the downloadable list because of the spam
> concerns but I'll happily accede to what the "Certs" want. I'd suggest an
> informal poll - RE Wrenches perhaps - trying to get some additional buy-in
> from Certificants. Again that's your call.
>
>  As to the date first Certified I don't think that should be too difficult
> but I hate to make promises before I speak the the folks who would actually
> do the work and find out from them how difficult or time consuming the task
> would be. I'm going to be in our office later this week and I'll keep you
> posted.
> Best regards,
> Ezra
>
> Ezra Auerbach
> Executive Director
> eauerbach at nabcep.org
> North American Board of Certified Energy Practitioners (NABCEP)
> 634 Plank Road
> Clifton Park, N.Y. 12065
> 1 800 654 0021
> 1 518 670 4553 Direct
> www.nabcep.org
>
> On 2010-03-01, at 9:01 PM, Allan Sindelar wrote:
> Ezra, Bob-O, Tim, Rex,
> Wow! I appreciate the dialogue that my suggestions engendered, and the fast
> response.
>
> Re the first issue, the national list: like Bob-O, I did not see spam
> potential as an issue, and I'm not knowledgeable enough about spam control
> to advise. I have observed that I get far fewer spam messages in my inbox
> than I did a few years ago - perhaps one or two a day, versus 15-20 maybe 4
> years ago, and I haven't changed either email addresses or public
> visibility.
>
> I would consider a national list to be a convenience more than a necessity.
> You are all aware that I am quite protective of proper use of the logo and
> any claims of certification - I have shared some of my efforts with you. But
> I have seldom been hindered by having to check state lists, so it's not a
> big deal for my needs - more a suggestion. Perhaps there are others for whom
> this would make a bigger difference.
>
> On the other issue, I'll offer two perspectives, closely related. As NABCEP
> certification becomes widespread and necessary for so many installations,
> you are most likely experiencing ongoing pressure to certify more
> installers. I have already seen the qualification standards become
> diminished - where an applicant once needed to lead at least two
> installations to qualify, now he or she need only show "experience
> installing PV systems occurring at some point in the two (2) years prior to
> submitting an application". And certification is certification, by which I
> mean that once certified, there are no additional "master" or "graybeard"
> additional levels available. So this becomes a very simple way to identify
> how many years an installer has been certified to have the highest
> qualification level our industry offers.
>
> That's the objective perspective. The other is personal: I want to be
> acknowledged as one of the original 44 (?) that passed the first exam. It's
> an achievement I don't mind being available to those who care. And it will
> matter more as the years go by. It's a very easy way to recognize the old
> timers. It's also the way to recognize the people who saw enough value in
> the fledgling NABCEP effort to take and pass the exam before it meant
> anything, and with no idea what it would someday count for.
>
> Bob-O, re "I think perhaps we should also consider adding the year that the
> Certification expires": to me that is a separate issue, and one of not much
> concern. It's one, two, or three years away - big deal. You're either valid
> or expired. But if you add expiration year, then also decide whether
> Certificants who are expired disappear from the list or have "expired" and
> the year next to their name, but remain on the list as once having been
> Certified. Unimportant to me, just bouncing around ideas here.
>
> One more thing - I hate SurveyMonkey. It requires choosing one of the
> offered answers, even if none of the choices fits. And you can't skip an
> unanswerable question. Ugh!
>
> Does this help?
> Allan
>
>
> Ezra Auerbach wrote: I'll wait to hear back from Allan before we make any
> changes - if in doubt kick the idea around with a few other installer Certs
> informally and we'll use their responses to gauge if we need a full survey.
> Work for you?
> Ezra
>
>  <http://www.nabcep.org/>
>
> On 2010-03-01, at 8:02 AM, Bob-O Schultze wrote:
> The spam thing is something I hadn't considered. Clearly a trade-off.
> Adding the year of initial certification would take some work, but it's a
> one-time thing. IF we do that, I think perhaps we should also consider
> adding the year that the Certification expires. That would be an ongoing
> chore, but perhaps it could be automated by linked spreadsheets or
> something.
> Allan, it's your suggestion. In light of Ezra's thoughts, do you still
> think alphabetizing the Certificant's names on the website has more merit
> than the potential anti-spam effect? Personally, I'm not sure the anti-spam
> thing is that relevant as anyone can copy and paste the current list into
> another document very easily, although state by state only.
> Perhaps we should put this out to our Certs for a vote? Via a survey monkey
> or ...?
> Bob-O
>
>
> On Mar 1, 2010, at 4:17 AM, Ezra Auerbach wrote:
> Hi gents,
> A couple of thoughts. I think we could add year of certification with undue
> administrative burden-I will want to check with Tim-it will fall to him to
> implement.
> With respect to a list, we long ago decided against publishing a complete
> listing to make it more difficult for spammers.
> So, it's the Certificants call. Bob-O if you are totally good with the
> potential of more list spamming it would be easy to post a list.
> Tawk?
> Ezra
> Executive Director
> NABCEP
>
>
> On 2010-02-28, at 12:52 PM, Bob-O Schultze <bob-o at electronconnection.com>
> wrote:
> Hiya Allen and All,
> Both good ideas which I think we could -and should- implement, especially
> the alphabetizing.
> Ezra, I think a decision like this is way within your purview. Let's talk
> about it.
> Bob-O
>   _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
>
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>
> Options & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
> List-Archive:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
> List rules & etiquette:
> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>
> Check out participant bios:
> www.members.re-wrenches.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
>
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>
> Options & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
> List-Archive:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
> List rules & etiquette:
> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>
> Check out participant bios:
> www.members.re-wrenches.org
>
>
>

-- 
"Don't get me wrong: I love nuclear energy! It's just that I prefer fusion
to fission. And it just so happens that there's an enormous fusion reactor
safely banked a few million miles from us. It delivers more than we could
ever use in just about 8 minutes. And it's wireless!"

~William McDonough
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20100319/b68f92fc/attachment-0004.html>