ASCP and NCA create a single credentialing agency, effective October 23, 2009
Life is about to become simpler for Medical Technologists (MTs) and Clinical Laboratory Scientists (CLSs)! A single certification agency for medical laboratory professionals was announced last Friday, based on an agreement between the American Society for Clinical Pathology Board of Registry (BOR) and the National Credentialing Agency for Laboratory Personnel (NCA).
The new, consolidated credentialing entity will be called the ASCP Board of Certification (BOC). Effective on October 23, 2009, the ASCP BOC will serve as the certification body for medical laboratory professionals. The NCA will be dissolved as a corporation.
Finalization of this agreement was jointly announced by Kathleen Becan-McBride, Ed.D., MT(ASCP), Chair of the ASCP Board and Registry Board of Governors, and Susan Morris, CLS (NCA), NCA President. It was last July 21 when both groups first disclosed their agreement to form a new consolidated agency for certifying medical laboratory professionals. (See Dark Daily, “MT & CLS Laboratory Certification Agencies Agree to Unite”)
According to E. Blair Holladay, PhD, SCT (ASCP), Executive Director of ASCP Board of Registry, this new credentialing entity essentially ends the polarization and confusion in the area of official recognition for lab professionals. “This agreement affects some 500,000 medical lab professionals that both organizations have certified over the past 30 and 80 years respectively” said Holladay.
“All individuals certified by the BOR and those that maintain active certification by the NCA will be transferred to the new Board of Certification, and no examination will be required,” noted Holladay. “In addition, those individuals certified as clinical laboratory professionals by either organization under their mandatory recertification or certification maintenance program (CMP) will receive new credentialing designations.
“Medical Technologists (MT) and Clinical Laboratory Scientists (CLS) will receive a unified designation and be called Medical Laboratory Scientists (MLS), and the ‘ASCP’ suffix will be attached to all BOC certifications. The designation will be MLS (ASCP),” continued Holladay. “Medical Laboratory Technicians (MLT) and Clinical Laboratory Technicians (CLT) will be unified as Medical Laboratory Technicians (MLT).”
“For new graduates, a single credential and single standard of qualification will simplify entry into the profession,” said Morris. “Likewise, employers will find it easier to set standards for entry level competency that will ensure patient safety.”
“Unity in the clinical laboratory profession will bring more recognition and respect from the public and other healthcare professions,” explained Becan-McBride. “We will increase our credibility when advocating for the profession on legislative and regulatory issues that impact our practice.”
“By bringing these two organizations together and unifying the credentialing process, we end 30 years of polarization of credentialing,” Holladay commented. “Having two credentials polarized hiring practices among laboratories and forced educators of laboratory training programs to choose between two agencies when recommending certification to their students. It also was confusing for personnel departments in hospitals and laboratories to identify which credential they should seek when hiring a laboratory professional.
“It was not an overnight process to bring about a single certification agency,” added Holladay. “It took four years and involved many hours of negotiation in order to identify the myriad factors important for both organizations. Most professions have a single certifying body and one credential. That’s not true in the laboratory medicine profession.”
The BOC Board of Governors will be composed of five ASCP Fellows (pathologists), five ASCP laboratory professionals, four representatives of ASCLS, two representatives of the Association of Genetic Technologists, eight representatives from the eight participating societies respectively, and one public representative.
Laboratory professionals should view the consolidation of credentialing as a positive step forward for the future of laboratory medicine. In response to changing medical technologies and new forms of healthcare delivery systems, the laboratory medicine profession needs to better align laboratory education and training to meet the demand which will be mandated by this new paradigm of practice. The unification of these organizations and the formation of the ASCP Board of Certification is one important step in this transformation.
ASCP BOR and NCA Form Single Certification Agency
MT & CLS Laboratory Certification Agencies Agree to Unite
I dislike NCA since even though you dont have BS in CLS or MT, you can still take the exam and then be classified as a MT. In my opinion that just lowers the standards for the rest of us. Decreases our pay and basically tells me that anyone with a BS degree can do what we do.
It is about time that this finally happened in the US.
From that point of view we just were a “third world country” and our colleagues of the British Commonwealth just did not understand how was it possible the enormous and unnecessary diversity in our licensing system.
Also the lack of uniformity allowed irregularities in hiring practices and salaries in the US. That will come to an end.
René J. Buesa
Standardization of the certification will simplify and clarify the laboratory professional to the “outside world”. However, I feel somewhat like “Art” who commented on the equality of background for MT vs NCA. I knew of some laboratory personnel in the past who could not pass the MT ASCP exam so went for the NCA and became certified.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if all the different Laboratory Registeries could merge together as one and not just ASCP-NCA. Why is AAB not included in this merger?
As a Registered Medical Technologist (AAB) who passed the HEW testing offered in the ’80’s and fall under the CLIA “88 guidelines, with over 35 years experience working in the Medical Laboratory field I feel ostracized by NCA and ASCP because they will not recognize Medical Technologists like myself. There is already a shortage of good Medical Technologists (CLS) and the merger of ASCP and NCA will just increase the shortage of good Medical Technologists (CLS).
I graduated from Gradwohl School of Laboratory Technique and have 35 years of Laboratory experience and I resent that because I do not have a Bachelors degree I should not be considered a Medical Technologist or CLS. I have gone from being a technician, to passing the HEW that quilfied me to be considered a Medical Technologists under CLIA ’88 and for the last 9 years worked as a Laboratory Director in a County Hospital.
Technologists like myself have 10 to 15 years yet to work in the Lab field before we retire, but with the ASCP-NCA merger Techs like myself will be forced out or only be accepted as Medical Technicians or CLT’s, which is unfair after serving the Laboratory profession for over 35 years. Where is the respect and acknowledgement from ASCP and NCA to these people who have served the Laboratory Profession with such dedication?
Our field is the lowest paying ancillary profession, a BSMT gets paid lower than a AS RN. So your saying this will merger will help the field? WRONG!!
We have MD influence in our field, that is why we are paid terrible, we need to take care of our own field and not have the ASCP logo with LABORATORY SCIENCE.
RN, PT, Pharmacy, have NO MD influence, they are paid well. They take care of their own certification and licensing board. There is no MD influence.
Our field will forever be a stepping stone to better paying fields like pharmacy, physical therapy.
I had 24 people graduate with me in my CLS/MT program, only two are left (myself included). I am trying to get into pharmacy schools were they have standards, no MD influence, and one of the highest paying ancillary fields out there.
This field will always have a shortage, the new BOC, has 5 MD on the board, do we have lab techs on a MD board? How is having MD’s going to help our career by attracting students and increasing salaries so people would want to stay in the field?
Good luck, as you see more hospitals are hiring MLT’s b/c the students at the university levels are interesting in a field with potential not a dead end field like the laboratory were the MD’s could care less if a chimp or human was pushing buttons as long as they can lace their own pockets.
After serving this field for 4 years my salary range has not been changed. Paying far less in comparison to other healthcare field and doing the same amount of work with stress.
Another thing i have noted that ascp has very stringent application process in comparison to other agencies like nca. I did not like the merge, at least people have other options not only ascp.
And if you want to merge why dont you make only one agency because there are other agencies exit after this also.
And so true we need to eliminate doctors influence in this field and make it independent. After all this is a critical field like other health care fields.
I would like to comment on other peoples view here that bs in mt is not required for the exam! actually anybody having science background should be eligible to take the test. And i am an nca certified and my test was not at all simple! that is why nca and ascp are called equivalent and are merged together. And i believe if somebody can pass nca he/she can pass ascp and vice versa.
I agree with Rick and Art. Why are we still under the Pathologists and not our own organization and certification? I have a niece that just got out of Radiology school and is making starting out what I’m making after being in this field for 20 years. I love being a MT but with this merge, I feel like we are being degraded if there is no difference between degreed and non-degreed techs. I worked hard to get a BS and still not even close to the salary that RN’s make. Somethings got to change and I don’t think this merge is it.
This thread is just full of misinformation. Art and Gigi are way off.
First off, its AMT and AAB are the certs that do NOT require a Bachelor’s degree. Both NCA and ASCP did/do. For you to say otherwise is just flat out wrong.
Second yes, NCA had routes for you to become a CLS if you had a bachelors degree in another area (IE Biology, Chemistry) accompanied with experience and/or an AS MLT degree, but so did ASCP. Their routes were VERY similar. The only major difference was ASCP required more experience in an area, but otherwise the route was the same.
To say it “degrades” the certification for the two to combine is absolutely ridiculous. You had to fulfill those requirements to be able to take the certification test and again it was similar for both certs.
Hey Jean I feel your pain, I also took the HEW exam. In fact I took it in 1987 the last time it was offered right after getting my AAS in clinical lab. I also took the ASCP MLT and the NCA CLT. I was told at the time that the HEW certification gave me the title of Medical Technologist. That is what I have been for 23 years now. I have been in several supervisory positions including as a Lab manager and currently am a technical supervisor. Today I was informed that the hospital I work at has decided to raise the pay of the MT’s and Phlebotomists, leave the MLTs at current pay rate and I will now be considered an MLT because my two associates degrees, 23 years and HEW does not qualify me to be called an MT. Now I have to wonder what next? Will they decide I am suddenly not qualified to be a supervisor despite my years of experience? And now I am paid less than the tech with a BS in fine arts because she qualified to take the AMT MT exam. I love my job but have to wonder what the future holds for me and other HEW MT’s
Well we want a certification and organization that is not led by the pathologists to take the lead…but look at the results you get when people ask about the ONE known group that does just that–AMT??? If someone says they are AMT certified, the ASCP techs jump all over them for being “less educated” or “less qualified”. I just liked the idea that the group was about ME and my job, not about the lab, the pathologist or endless QC! Plus it was CHEAPER to be a freaking member and to keep up my cert!
BY the way, AMT requires a bachelors for the MT as well….it doesn’t have to be in MTechnology, but you do have to have a bachelors.
I despise ASCP for many of the aforementioned reasons and therefore chose to be certified by AMT as an MT. I see no further reason to continue any education in this field. I have been an MT for almost two decades now and have seen no positive change in this field. I have watch several Universities close and the quality of MLTs from tech schools decline. Pay is substandard but respect from other hospital personnel is non-existent. RNs no nothing of lab techs and consider us all idiots. Most lab administrators perpetuate this by not defending our interests. I truly believe this IS a dieing field. In Georgia to (apparently) address the shortage of MTs state govt decided to repeal legislation that forbids OJT of lab techs. This will only perpetuate other hospital’s poor impression of lab professionals. Unless something seriously significant changes soon, I see no further reason to stay in this field. The ASCP NCA merger will do little since there are still several other certification agencies. It is true to form for ASCP thinking they are the one and only.
As a medical laboratory student, I now realize that I have a lot of work to do. There are so many complaints about a lack of respect and pay that I feel that this attitude surrounds the profession. I pose this question, Why do you not change this yourselves? For example, women have the right to vote because women fought against overwhelming odds. I am glad there is a single licensing agency now, and glad that it’s ASCP. From an outsiders point of view, it seems the more reputable of the two.
It seems that there is more complaining here, than actual organizing.
“If you don’t like something, change it. If you can’t change it, change your attitude. Don’t complain.” Maya Angelou
I have read all the comments. My case is different, I come from California and live now in Michigan. I applied for both licenses, the California certification and the ASCP, but was only allowed to take the California exam because I did not have the 6 years experience required in the country. I was told that the California certification was the hardest in the country and would be accepted everywhere.
I had 16 years of experience,including several years a supervisor. Then my family moved to Michigan where I have not been able to work in a laboratory for several years now. No one wants to hire me but the big hospitals downtown allow the Canadian workers to work without certifications from the States, what is the logic here?
The fact is, the more education you have, the better off you are……always in this very tiny insignificant world. In the end, everyone of us will have our eyelids and lips sewn together so we can’t argue about or view the tiny professional bothersome trifles that exist between some of us here on earth. I hope you all have a better day. Remember this: If humans really loved each other and GOD the way we should, we would never require any type of medicine and all this bickering and chaos would never exist. It is interesting to also note that inspite of all this “technology” we have the most obesity and chronic disease per capita on the planet. What are we really striving for fellow scientists? We should look into ourselves first for the answers we seek.
As a former Medical Technologist and Current RN, let me tell you that until the laboratory is governed by laboratorians and their is one standard way of being certified, the laboratory is going to get the short end of the stick.
RN’s have to graduate from a school of nursing. Med Techs can get all most any kind of or combination of a science background degree, apply for cert., and get a job.
Unlike the idea of HEW and other methods of entry for Techs, there is no grandfathering in for nurses. Either you have the degree or you don’t.
Techs have to get it together and get unified. I’m sory that there are people on this site that feel that they’ve been left behind, but Tech’s have to continue to push forward, leaving old ideas behind and make waves in the profession if they want to be considered relevant.
Well, I have always argued about the A(American) S(society)c(clinical)p(patholgy/pathologist,i.e. MD, Boss). It is a ruse to think until we get our own national certifying agency, not self-serving agency, that we wil be anything other than second class people in the hospital. I believe an independent agency (Health/ Human services etc.) should qualify MT’s and not some agency that has a monetary reason for keeping the pay low as well as recognition. I WAS certified by ASCP as a MT, but after 5 years or so, (now MT for 30+years) I became disenchanted with the registry and became unregistered period. So what? What are they going to do, fire me? No, because most hospitals don’t even know there is a certification for MT’s. Good Luck with this “merger.
For what it seems to be worth now, I am an ASCP certified MLT based on a quarter system, 2 yr degree and I have steadily seen everyone with a HS diploma to a 4 yr biology major be able to work and supervise a laboratory, inclusive of waived, mod and high complexity.
How disappointing that all that theory and experience I have, 18 yrs worth, seems to be reduced to an ABC-123 mentality. I see healthcare workers from other disciplines stepping into the allied laboratory positions, yet these same professionals in their fields have their own credentialing required to work their fields. It really hurts to see my field taken with so little regard to education, training and dedication by everyone, save the poor tech. You can call that certification most anything, what the Laboratory Professional needs is some real bite on the recognition and representation of what our field represents, exactly.
You see the MD’s have cunningly done it again by pulling one of the only independent certifying agency for MT’s and crushing it by the pretext of a merger. NCA was supposed to be the one to pull all the ASCP certifiants to it’s side and request that they drop the P or pathology from their new name. But NO! The doctors, whose only role to go to medical school is to come out and make money at the expense of MT’s prevented our voice to be heard. It is disgusting and a shame that after 23 years as an MT, my little sister who just graduated from an associate degree RN nursing program, should be making the same or more money than me. I feel that laboratory medicine should start offering a professional doctorate program in Clinical Laboratory Medicine, whereby graduates are trained in both anatomy and the clinical laboratory. In that way, the MD’s are kept completely out of the laboratory and only then can we have a voice coming from within the laboratory. As it stands now, the anatomic paths are read by cytotechs, but signed off by MD’s. When that day comes whereby a unique laboratory professional not called an MD could sign an anatomic path report, then will the laboratory be independent of doctors.
I was kicked to the curb in November of 2008. I thought I had everything I needed to land another job….MS in education, BS (Biology and minor in Chemistry) I took an examine for every one of these organizations and passed, ASCP(MT), NCA (MT),AMT(MT), FL(MT)5 disciplines. I finally realized my 25 plus years meant nothing. Thee hiring institutions could give a “RATS A$$”. An MLT will be hired before you with less education and experience. To make a long story short, I QUIT!!!!period.
I built a retail store on some property I purchased 25 years ago, from ground up and make 5 times a MTs salary, not to mention the headache of being a MT, being treated as a “stepchild” to the profession, getting no respect…above all, I have my future and career in my hands and I am doing just fine.
I too am very disappointed. Every state should require us to be licensed which would mandate the 4 yr degree requirement for an MT/CLS. I recently applied for a blood bank supervisory position where I am employed. I am well credentialed with a MS,BS in Clinical Laboratory Science and certified as a CLS(ASCP)cm with over 25 years experience as a generalist, 10 of those years as a supervisor with mangement skills, sounds great right! Ouch! Low and behold my manager gives the position to a 2 year degree MLT with no supervisory skills, only 2 years of experience and he is now my boss! How can a 2 year degree MLT oversee the 4 year degree techs???? What gives. What does any certifying agency do about this???
I am an MT(HHS),MLS (ASCP)cm. I loathe the ASCP and always have since I began my career. I attended a technical school that taught me all the technical things I needed to know to perform my duties and save lives. I had already taken the classes one needs to have a BS-English,Sociology,History,etc-while pursuing a different degree. I have everything someone who has a BS has,but because I don’t have it all from the same institution it doesn’t “count”. I have been looked down on by those in my profession that have BS degrees for almost 30 years. These are the same people who whine and complain about not getting respect from other in the medical field. They might want to start by treating others with respect first before they demand it for themselves. I never complained about how many units a bleeding patient needed because I wanted to go to lunch or rushed through a diff on a patient with ALL to go to break, or left blood gases not done to leave early to get to the club before it closed, or falsified patient records to cover up the fact that my co-worker first reported a 3.5 instead of a 5.3. THAT’s what I have witnessed snobs with BS degrees in Medical Technology do. Not once did a patient in DIC refuse the blood I crossmatched for her,not once did anyone question the pH of 7.1 on an intubated baby’s blood gas I performed, nor ever question the validity of the positive pregnancy test I performed on an ER patient with severe abdominal pain who turned out to have an ectopic pregnancy because I don’t have a BS. For my part, I never found anything about the War of Roses or the knowledge that Moroccans eat with their right hands from a common bowl to be helpful in identifying the antibody I had eluted from the rbcs of a baby with HDNB, or anything else having anything remotely to do with medical technology. A BS is exactly that-BS.
I have about 30 years experience in the healthcare field.Most of it has been as a Medical Technologist. A few years has been as a Registered Nurse. Regarding salaries, my starting salary as a RN was far less than as a MT with 25 years experience. However; it was bumped up close to because of specialty pay and off shift differentials. That is not the case today I am finding out that the RN perks are (have)disappeared. And off shift differentials markedly reduced with increased nurse to patient load. That is why I am not in nursing anymore,the liability and stress, and not being paid adequately. I have recently have had travel Med Tech positions. Comparing nursing to med tech, Nurse are more unified, visible and have a stronger voice than MT to rally for better working pay, etc. MT profession has been fragmented as an organization from the beginning. Note: California does NOT recognize ASCP certifications from former NCA certified CLS.
Can Masters in MLS move out of the hospital settings and be like other MASTERs who moved to the BIOTECH industries and make a lot more $$$. In fact, could it be another NEW industry by itself? The MLS are certified and can be phlebotomists and can go into clinical settings and work in laboratories handling HUMAN SPECIMENS. So is there not an industry that can take MLS to a higher worth?
BioTech industies did something similar. They pulled HIGHLY EDUCATED ACADEMICS students with MASTERS and ph.D into a laboratories creating innovative technologies with VENTURE CAPITALIST help and …. wah-lah… a million/billion dollars FDA approved inventions, medicines, etc for everyone thinking outside the box.
I think maybe a strong group/organization is needed to take HIGHLY educated MLS to the next level. The DOCTORATE degree is available, but its career path is no difference… or is there?
You can call that certification most anything, what the Laboratory Professional needs is some real bite on the recognition and representation of what our field represents, exactly.
So I just graduated with a B.S, Biology-Chemistry , started working in a small critial access hospital and was interested in getting my MLS cert. However, I called ASCP and to see what I needed, and they required I got back to school for another year for lab experience. ??? I’m confused, I’ve been employed as a tech and I have a bachelors degree, so why can’t I take the exam?? I hope in the end, this is all worth it. I asked about how much money a CLS, or MT/ MLS makes…and Hopefully that increases over the next 10 years. Good techs are always in high demannd.
Just hooked into this site. Question: Is the HEW still valid? At one time, as it was a Federal exam, it was considered more than acceptable.
In response to your comment on March 2012. I feel your pain. I loved my career as a MT AMT with 30 years experience as a generalist. I made a good salary. I took a break in 2011 to care for an ill relative. Then in 2013 when I tried to find work was told MT AMT is not acceptable in South Carolina Hospitals. When I contacted ASCP I was not qualified to set for their exam because I graduated in 1983 and my 30 years experience is null and void! So at 55 years old I have to start all over and find a new career for the next 15 years. Retirement is not an option anymore for our generation. But I commend you for not giving up!
I am an mt ASCP with 15 years experience. I just got terminated last year and replaced with a graduate from med tech college. It is an unaccredited certificate program with classes that don’t even transfer to a real college. There is no license requirement in this state and the hospital I’m at is all about saving money. I can’t even find a job. Nobody wants to pay me. I’m done. I’m finishing nursing school and going on to be a nurse practitioner. I’m going broke and getting nowhere fast. What does this say about our profession that we hire people from any school? Nurses and other allied professionals don’t accept this. We are just one step away from being eliminated or even further degraded and disrespected. If that’s possible.
There are several comments about the low pay compared to other healthcare professions. For pharmacy and physical therapy, there has been a trend to reduce the number of providers at the higher level and increasing the number of technicians.
The professional doctorate is an extension of that effort. It has the added benefit to their respective professions as building equality with the MD. However, in either case the MD is still the ‘captain’ of the team.
In the lab, the majority of professionals have bachelor degrees, in my experience. That may not be the case in many parts of the country. However, if the majority have bachelor degrees, then that dilutes the effect of the degree on pay. Employers have no need to increase pay due to a degree.
Furthermore, MT and MLT perform the same work and the same scope of work. This is also true of RNs when dealing with patient care. The difference comes about in those value-added tasks. A bachelor degreed RN will be more likely to run clinical trials, to perform specialty tasks such as line care, wound care, or infection control.
What value-added tasks exist in the lab? My lab makes no difference between AS-MLT and BD-MT after five years experience. The benefit of an MT then is only during that timeframe where pay raises (if any) advance marginally faster for the MT. After five years, pay is essentially the same.
A professional PhD program in laboratory science would be a great way to increase the power of laboratory professionals. Most pathologists are not very conversant in the clinical laboratory. A technical director (PhD) and a medical director (MD) is currently the status in our clincal chemistry and molecular pathology sections.
When a laboratory scientist is able to become department head will be a milestone for all laboratory professionals.
Wow, this thread is full of venting. *yikes*
As a BS in Bio, with a minor in Chem, I took way more science classes than any BS-MT does (they get 1 years worth of credit just for clinical rotations on stuff they already studied!).
When I decided to enter the clinical field I was told there was no way for me to even sit for MLT exam from any agency. I was shocked. Everyone wanted me to return to school and spend 10K+ and a year of my life just to get a NAACLS approved course, about 50% of which was complete review IMO. So I did it. the DAY I graduated, I submitted the paperwork and a month later tested as a MLT(ASCP)CM with ZERO studying, cramming, or any anxiety at all. I could have phones in that exam it was so easy (660 I think, probably could knocked out a 800 if I studied for it like it was BioChem 462 lol).
So now I’m looking at ASCP, AMT, and AAB and they all claim to be “competancy based certification”, and they all require a BS to sit for the exam. Unfortunatley, ASCP says my BS AND the AAT degree I have isn’t enough… they want me to have 2 years workign in the field before I can test for MLS(ASCP)CM. What a joke.
AMT wants 1 year.
AAB lets me sit now apparently… so thats what I’ll do.
I am aware that the Pathologist-run ASCP tells MTs they can’t know their job unless they took a 3-yr BS in MT or did any OTHER BS and have 2 years work as a MLT… but I find that a bit condescending. Nothing I can do about it, so I’ll ignore their boys club for 2 years while I work as a techologist for a local lab with a MT(AAB) cert.
I understand the need to unify the field and standardize things. ASCP (and NCA), AMT, AAB, HHS (formerly HEW), and state licenses like Cali’s CLS all confuse HR reps I feel. While I dislike the idea of ASCP handing out certs to NCA members without BS I can’t tell them to preserve their accademic standards, thats on them.
What I would like is to eventually see an agreement between ASCP, AMT, and AAB to:
1) unify their test type (the electronic ASCP testing is quick and painless)
2) unify the test content split between topics (this should be easy, they’re all pretty close)
3) unified test question bank. There’s no reason anyone should be harder or easier than the others… its the same job right?
4) unify the requirement for a BS, and a NAACLS program (either the 1.3 year MLT, or 3 year MT) to make sure they have experience with some machines (though any real lab will train you up on their stuff before you go solo anyway).
5) drop any MLT+experience with no BS nonsense. If you want to be taken seriously in healthcare, you need EDUCATION… not a bunch of timeslips showing you loaded tube racks for 10 years. :-/
I have over 37 years of clinical laboratory experience, ASCP (MT), AMT (CLC), NCA (CLS), Ed. D, MPH, and MS. Currently at NASA, after working as a Consultant, Laboratory Director, Manager of Shift operation at a large hospital in Houston, etc.
I recently applied at University of Texas in Galveston Texas for the Doctor of Clinical Laboratory Science program and was rejected (no reason given), I suspect it was because the two professors I interviewed were young, inexperience and had no idea of how important it is to move our profession forward and control our own destiny. They were not open to the idea of Medical Laboratory Technologist working independently. As hard as many good laboratory personnel fought for the Doctoral programs, it still seems to be under the control of other individuals beside the working Medical Laboratory Technologist.
I hope that in the future the Doctoral programs are able to survive under different control administration and control by true laboratory professionals minus the MD’s.
“MMarie on January 23, 2010 at 5:20 pm”
I also took the HEW in 1987. In 2009 when the two organizations merged I saw the handwriting on the wall. I was concerned my lab would reclassify me from a MT to a MLT. I took money out of my retirement, at 55yrs old, to attain a bachelor degree in MLS. After reading your concerns I’m glad I did.