Volume 89 - Spring/Summer 2005	Download

Dr. NAACLS Advice for Accredited and Approved Programs

Dear Dr. NAACLS:

Spring is a busy time with students gearing up for finals and meeting to discuss the next changes for the next fall. In the midst of this, I receive a survey request from NAACLS, and a link to a six page online survey!
This is a lot of work - what is the data used for?

Sincerely,
Exasperated Program Director


Dear Exasperated Program Director,

NAACLS is an accreditor of educational programs and is recognized by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation. As such, NAACLS has a responsibility to gather information about the state of clinical laboratory science education and to keep appraised of the happenings in NAACLS accredited and approved programs. NAACLS meets this responsibility in a variety of ways, including programmatic reviews, the requirements of Standard 22, and maintaining a variety of "lines of communication" between programs and NAACLS.

One of the more important of these "lines of communication" is the annual survey. With the survey, NAACLS can ask the entire body of accredited and approved programs questions at one time. This differs from telephone and email inquiries from program directors to the NAACLS office, in which the programs are asking the questions. It also differs from programmatic review, where only the programs under review are responding. The importance of the survey is one the reasons that NAACLS requires, under Standard 22, that programs respond to the survey.

I had the chance to talk with the survey designers - and can now give you the "Dr. NAACLS Exclusive Inside Scoop." The annual survey questions are divided into three different categories, and each category serves a different purpose.

The first category is contact and classification information. These questions are used to update the NAACLS database about new phone numbers, new presidents, new emails and, especially in today's workplace, changes in a sponsoring institution's name or administration due to a merger.

The second category contains the longitudinal questions regarding admissions, attrition, graduates and placement rates. Long-time NAACLS program directors may recall similar questions on the old AMA survey - and that is intentional. This information is used to identify trends in the profession, and is presented to NAACLS' sponsoring agencies as well as researchers reviewing the profession.

The final category is the "other" category. This is where the NAACLS Board of Directors can place specific questions that give the information they need to set appropriate policy.

NAACLS recognizes that program directors are busy people, and is diligent in reviewing the survey to insure that nothing extraneous is included. In addition, NAACLS' staff is always on hand to help when the questions are unclear.

The information from the Annual Survey travels a long way, and your completion of the survey is the most important first step!

Sincerely,
Dr. NAACLS
 

Top of the News
			A Coalition is Pushing for Phlebotomy Personnel Standards by Dennis Ernst, MT (ASCP) Director, Center for Phlebotomy Education, Inc.
			CEO's Corner NAACLS Survey by Olive M. Kimball, PhD, EdD Chief Executive Officer
			NAACLS is Studying Advanced Level CLS/MT Lucy J. Randles, M.A., CLS/CLDDir
			President's Report by David D. Gale, PhD President, NAACLS Board of Directors
Features
			Combining Self Studies by Marcia A. Armstrong, PhD, MT(ASCP), CLS(NCA) Chair, Programs Approval Review Committee
Other News
			Dr. NAACLS Advice for Accredited and Approved Programs

	Select an Issue   Vol 109 - Fall 2011 Vol 108 - Summer 2011 Vol 107 - Spring 2011 Vol 106 - Volume 106 - Fall NAACLS News Vol 105 - Summer 2010 Vol 104 - Spring 2010 NAACLS News Vol 103 - Fall 2009 NAACLS News Vol 102 - Summer 2009 Vol 101 - Spring 2009 Vol 100 - Winter 2008 Vol 99 - Summer 2008 Vol 98 - Spring 2008 Vol 97 - Winter 2007 Vol 96 - Summer 2007 Vol 95 - Spring 2007 Vol 94 - Winter 2006 Vol 93 - Spring/Summer 2006 Vol 92 - Special Edition Vol 91 - Winter 2005 Vol 90 - Fall 2005 Vol 89 - Spring/Summer 2005 Vol 87 - Fall 2004 Vol 86 - Spring/Summer 2004 Vol 85 - Fall 2003 Vol 84 - Spring/Summer 2003 Vol 83 - Winter 2003 Vol 82 - Fall 2002 Vol 81 - Spring / Summer 2002 Vol 80 - Winter 2002 Vol 79 - Fall 2001 Vol 78 - Spring / Summer 2001 Vol 77 - Winter 2001 Vol 76 - Fall 2000 Vol 75 - Spring / Summer 2000 Vol 74 - Winter 2000 Vol 73 - Fall 1999 Vol 72 - Spring / Summer 1999 Vol 71 - Winter 1999 Vol 70 - Fall 1998 Vol 69 - Spring / Summer 1998 Vol 68 - Winter 1998 Vol 67 - Fall 1997 Vol 66 - Spring 1997 Vol 65 - Winter 1996 Vol 64 - Summer 1996 Vol 63 - Spring 1996 Vol 62 - Winter 1996 Vol 61 - Summer 1995 Vol 60 - Spring 1995 Vol 59 - Fall 1994 Vol 58 - Summer 1994 Vol 57 - Spring 1994 Vol 56 - Fall 1993 Vol 55 - Summer 1993 Vol 54 - Spring 1993 Vol 53 - Fall 1992 Vol 52 - Summer 1992 Vol 51 - Spring 1992 Vol 50 - Fall 1991 Vol 49 - Summer 1991 Vol 48 - Spring 1991 Vol 47 - Fall 1990 Vol 46 - Summer 1990 Vol 45 - Spring 1990 Vol 44 - Fall 1989 Vol 43 - Summer 1989 Vol 42 - Winter 1989 Vol 41 - Fall 1988 Vol 40 - April 1988 Vol 39 - December 1987 Vol 38 - September 1987 Vol 37 - Spring 1987 Vol 36 - Winter 1987 Vol 35 - October 1986 Vol 34 - November 1985 Vol 33 - November 1984 Vol 32 - July 1984 Vol 31 - November 1983 Vol 30 - November 1982 Vol 29 - November 1981 Vol 28 - December 1980 Vol 27 - August 1980 Vol 26 - September 1979 Vol 25 - August 1979 Vol 24 - June 1979 Vol 23 - February 1979 Vol 22 - October 1978 Vol 21 - July 1978 Vol 20 - April 1978 Vol 19 - October 1977 Vol 18 - July 1977 Vol 17 - April 1977 Vol 16 - February 1977 Vol 15 - November 1976 Vol 14 - September 1976 Vol 13 - June 1976 Vol 12 - December 1975 Vol 11 - October 1975 Vol 10 - August 1975 Vol 9 - July 1975 Vol 8 - June 1975 Vol 7 - April 1975 Vol 6 - February 1975 Vol 5 - December 1974 Vol 4 - November 1974 Vol 3 - September 1974 Vol 2 - August 1974 Vol 1 - June 1974