Talk:National Institute for Certification in Engineering Technologies

NPOV tag
I've just wikified this page as part of WikiProject Wikify - added tags, logo, introduction - but something just doesn't quite feel right about the POV. I may be wrong so don't be offended - but if anybody knows this area I'd appreciate you input. Madmedea 23:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

"The private control of technologist registration has led to a loss of credibility for registered professionals. The National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) developed the certification program because they oppose legal recognition of technologist by the United States government through a licensing program. The loss of government oversite has led to competing ideologies from societies with different perspectives on what represents the qualities of a Technologist. The lack of a unified voice has led to a confusion that makes it unclear to determine which ideology would be best to represent the United States in signing the Sydney Accord.

The Technologist title from NICET is controversial because it doesn't require an examination for registration at the Technologist level. However, it does insist individuals sit for examination at the Technician levels. The Technologist registration requires that an individual will have graduated from a university that is ABET/TAC accredited and provide evidence of appropriate experience. The NICET organization and certifications do not have government oversite which allows the organization to make its own rules."

Could be that these two paragraphs both sound like they're ripped from a nicet PR firm. There's no proof about "Loss of credibility" or many other opinions listed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.51.46.196 (talk • contribs).


 * It's been 4 months since a POV tag was added. Is there still a dispute?  If not the tag will be removed. ndyguy 22:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to say that I am a Fire Protection Engineering Technician that is NICET certified, and can assure you that the neutrality of this article is not compromised. NICET is nothing more than exactly what it calls itself, an "Institution for the Certification of Engineering Technicians/Technologists". Also, in response to the unsigned comment about how it sounds like it's ripped from a PR firm... I'd like to ask, "How-so?". It weighs both ends of the argument equally, on one hand it says that it was created to oppose recognition of technologists by the US government by creating it's own non-profit certification program (Pro-NICET), and then in the next paragraph it says how the use of the term "Technologist" is controversial because the technologist level does not require any type of exam to achieve (Anti-NICET). Sounds pretty neutral to me. Any objections??? I'd also like to point out that even if you do find that to be biased in one way or another, NICET is not simply an institution for the certification of technologists (the title is slightly misleading), it is also an institution for the certification of engineering TECHNICIANS... I am one of these technicians, and I can ASSURE you that there is a heavy amount of testing required to be certified as a technician by NICET, and I can also tell you that biased or not, the pros of being NICET certified VASTLY outweigh the cons. I can attest first hand that NICET certified technicians make substantially more money than non-NICET certified technicians (at least in the Fire Protection field, as NICET is one of the only recognized institutions for certifying fire protection technicians, there is talk of change coming in the near future. The NFPA and NFSA are in the process of offering their own certifications which will be much more relevant to the field of fire protection/suppression, but as of right now, if you are a fire protection engineering technician, and you AREN'T NICET certified, you are undoubtedly making less money than your NICET certified peers).64.80.201.194 20:45, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Technologist vs. Technician? Maybe it's just me but isn't this kind of a petty argument to base a certifying commission upon? I recall that x-ray technicians used this kind of semantics in the distant past. It didn't last very long and was never written as a rule. Also why does not NICET administer or oversee a test like most other agencies? I agree with the above that points out that motives and intentions have no place here. Degreed engineers do not like non-degreed individuals calling themselves engineers.(Certified Radiological Equipment Specialist by the International Certification Commission) 4.230.114.219 (talk) 00:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)