Right Column

Minutes of the Examination and Technical Advisory Committees

MINUTES OF THE EXAMINATION COMMITTEE, TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND BOARD MEETING

August 7, 1998

2535 Capitol Oaks Drive, Suite 300A
Sacramento, CA 95833

1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER

Mr. Kresse and Mr. Williams called the meeting to order at 9:00 AM.

2. ROLL CALL TO ESTABLISH QUORUMS

Technical Advisory Committee:

Frank Kresse, Chair
Seena N. Hoose*
Monta Huber*
Robert Larson
Jerome Nelson
Lyne Perry

Absent: Carlene Merey, George E. Brogan

Examination Committee:

John Williams, Ph.D., Chair
Victor Cherven, Ph.D. (arrived 11:30 AM)
Scott Hector
Robert Lindblom
Sharon J. Reid*
Rebecca A. Sterbentz
Robert H. Sydnor

Absent: Ernest Weber

Also in Attendance:

Paul Sweeney, Executive Officer
Adam Mankoski, Enforcement Analyst
John G. Parrish, Ph.D., Executive Officer, State Mining and Geology Board
Roland Brady, Ph.D., California State University, Fresno
Robert Matthews, Ph.D., University of California, Davis

*ex-officio member

3. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS

There was no public comment.

4. CONSIDERATION OF TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE CANDIDATE FOR SELECTION BY THE STATE BOARD OF REGISTRATION FOR GEOLOGISTS AND GEOPHYSICISTS AT THE BOARD'S REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING ON AUGUST 14, 1998

The Technical Advisory Committee reviewed the applications for the Committee vacancy.

Mr. Kresse advised that due to the current make-up of the Committee, with a majority of the members from the Engineering Geology area, the Committee should recommend a candidate from the oil industry.

Mr. Lindblom urged the Committee to recommend a member of this industry to the Board for appointment at the Board's regularly scheduled meeting on August 14, 1998, because oil and gas are two of California's most important and valuable extractive industries.

Mr. Lindblom recommended both Donald Clarke and Donna Thompson for consideration.

Dr. Parrish expressed support of the appointment of a petroleum geologist to the Committee. Dr. Parish said that members of the petroleum industry represent a large percentage of the consulting community and need representation on the Technical Advisory Committee.

Mr. Nelson moved to recommend Donna M. Thompson for consideration by the Board for the vacancy on the Committee.

Ms. Perry seconded.

The motion passed unanimously.

5. DISCUSSION REGARDING ESTABLISHMENT OF CORE CURRICULA

Mr. Kresse discussed the need for core curricula. He stated that there is a need to identify those applicants who are qualified to take the examination. He identified a substantial problem with the pass rate for the Registered Geologist examination. The Committee hopes that adopting core courses will address one aspect of the issue of low pass rate.

Mr. Kresse stated that the Technical Advisory Committee has been discussing the core course issue for 20 years. In 1987 and 1994, the Committee made a recommendation to the Board to adopt core curricula. Mr. Kresse pointed out that Section 7841(b) of the Geologist and Geophysicist Act gives the Board statutory authority to implement regulations pertaining to geological criteria.

Dr. Williams discussed the changes in and fluid nature of geology departments in California and emphasized the necessity of aggressively involving the academic institutions in the core curricula discussion and formulation of regulations or guidelines. Dr. Williams explained that there is no accrediting agency for academic geology programs in California and consequently, no uniformity of curricula among geology departments. Dr. Williams stated that the knowledge of licensing and registration for geologists among the academic community is not extensive and that the current Act alienates the academic community.

Mr. Kresse reviewed Mr. Brogan's presentation to the Committee regarding core courses. Mr. Brogan identified the Committee core courses, universities responding with syllabi, units of core courses and content of core courses.

Dr. Brady expressed the following about the nature of geology departments and graduates:

Dr. Williams suggested that identifying core courses and communicating with the university faculty and students about the Board, licensure and the examination process could be accomplished by establishing core curricula guidelines for universities rather than regulations.

Dr. Matthews stressed the need for better communication. He suggested that representatives from the Board should visit colleges and community colleges to introduce the Board, the requirements for licensure and the need for mentoring and training to students.

Dr. Williams suggested that the Board provide more refined feedback to universities about performance on individual examination subject areas and to improve the information to the candidate about the format of the examination.

The Committee continued to discuss the dissemination of information to the universities regarding the performance of candidates from individual schools on subject areas of the examination. The universities may be able to use this information to examine their curriculum in various areas.

Mr. Sydnor discussed the portions of the examination that test the applicant's knowledge of Code. He suggested that the university geology departments are teaching the fundamentals of geology and that the subsequent five years of experience and mentoring is an effective means of learning applied methods that are tested on the examination.

Ms. Hoose expressed that the Board may not be ready to promulgate regulations at this time but would like to determine a way to keep those applicants who have taken courses not intended for professional geological practice from taking the examination.

Ms. Hoose suggested defining subject areas rather than course titles to eliminate the issue of variation of subjects discussed in courses of the same title.

Ms. Huber explained that it was never the intention of the Board to regulate course titles but rather to define a set of subject areas.

Ms. Reid reiterated that there is an increased need for information sharing. She suggests disseminating information about what is necessary to be a professional geologist and to be successful on the examination.

Mr. Sydnor agreed that at this point there is a great deal that could be accomplished by improving information to the applicants such as using the Website and posted materials at universities. Faculty and students could benefit from information about the Board, its suggestions for core subject matter and suggestions for success on the examination.

6. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD ON THE SUBJECT OF CORE CURRICULA

Dr. Williams summarized that there were candid ideas shared. Several areas of information distribution must be explored including better information about the format and content of the examination, graphics summarizing recommended subject areas for professional geologists and more sophisticated feedback to universities in terms of applicant performance.

Dr. Williams suggested determining the feasibility of a poster, a video, improved mailing lists to include specific professors and enhanced materials to the universities. Dr. Williams urged the Committee to develop information to and the ability to transfer information rather than creating regulations, while getting a better idea of the core course problem.

7. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS

Ms. Huber expressed her pride in what the Board, Committees and staff have been able to accomplish and commended the competent staff. She expressed her pleasure at the opportunity to work with everyone on the Committee and the Board.

8. ADJOURNMENT

Mr. Kresse and Mr. Williams adjourned the meeting at 12:00 Noon.