HFS Job Survey: Implications for Accreditation, Certification and Education

Abstract

Almost from the beginning of the human factors profession, people have wrestled with defining what human factors people do. In general, we have more or less accepted that what human factors is, is what human factors does. The problem has been that there has really not been a systematic study of what HF professional actually do, or what knowledges are important in their work. In addition, in recent years the Society has initiated efforts to develop certification and educational accreditation programs. Both these programs have had to depend on general impression of a small number of individuals as to what HF people do and need to know. Recently, the Human Factors Society undertook a survey of its membership (Sanders, Bied, & Curran, 1986) with one of the goals being to collect systematic data on what HF people do and need to know in their work. The objective of this symposium is to present information obtained from that survey and to discuss the implications of those data for certification, accreditation, and graduate education. The symposium is organized around two paper presentations. The first focuses on the activities performed by human factors professionals (Curran, Bied Sperling, & Sanders, 1986). The second deals with subject-matter areas considered important in the work of HF professionals (Bied Sperling, Curran, & Sanders, 1986). Comparisons are made between masters and doctorates, those with degrees from engineering departments and those with degrees from psychology departments, and those working in various types of organizations. Following the paper presentations, three panel members discuss the implications of the results for certification, accreditation, and graduate education. The three panel members are Ken Laughery Sr. (Chair of the Professional Standards Committee), Colin Drury (Member of Accreditation Subcommittee), and Robert Blanchard (Chair of the Certification Subcommittee). In addition to their involvement in accreditation and certification, they also represent psychology and engineering graduate programs, and industry perspectives. The discussants will address the implications of the results presented in the papers. The questions to be addressed will include: What differences in accreditation criteria are suggested by the differences between masters and doctorates and between psychologists and engineers? Should there be separate certifications for those with psychology and engineering degrees? Should there be separate accreditation criteria and requirements for psychology and engineering programs? Are our education programs adequately preparing students? Can two or three specialized human factors courses make an experimental psychologist or industrial engineer a human factors specialist? Are we making the best use of the talents of masters and doctorate level people on the job? Are we requiring knowledges and skills in our graduate programs that do not seem to be important on the job? The discussion and information presented in this symposium will be valuable for: (1) assessing whether graduate programs are providing the knowledges and skills actually used and considered important on the job; (2) assuring that a HFS certification program has content validity and addresses competencies actually needed by HF specialists; and (3) counseling students considering human factors as a career field.