System Dynamics Certification
Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2001 12:12 pm
Dear All,
The idea of SD certification is a very interesting issue but it might be
fraught with difficulty.
One precedent is that the Operational Research Society (which has around
5000 members world-wide) argued for at least 15 years over the establishment
of the Fellowship of OR - equivalent to certification. Eventually a
sub-group set up a Fellowship scheme of their own but it was never
recognised by the Society and seems to have been of little practical
benefit. Maybe someone will know better, but thats my assessment. The
implication may be that our society would achieve no better outcome.
A second potential problem is the legal aspect. People such as medical
doctors, architects and the like are allowed to practice as such by
authorities which derive their legitimacy from the government. A doctor can
be struck off for malpractice and that is effectively by the authority of
the State. This is based on the need to protect the public against the
potentially serious consequences of incompetence. There are no such
consequences from the malpractice of SD. Further, I can see the prospect of
deep trouble if Bloggs is told by a self-appointed body that he is not an
acceptable system dynamicist. He might well have grounds to sue, as
individual persons, the members of the committee which had assessed him to
be incompetent. I think that there would be a need to take some serious
(and probably expensive) legal advice which would have to allow for legal
systems in many countries.
Thirdly, how a subject is taught can be influenced very heavily by how
universities require examinations to be conducted. That differs so widely
from one country to another (and we have members in no fewer than 55
countries from Argentina to Vietnam) that I shudder to think of the
complexity.
A more positive idea is the role of external examiners. In most countries
which have British-derived education systems, and maybe others, university
exams are moderated by external assessors. For written exams, they review
the questions to be set, and can over-rule the person who set them, they
then evaluate the marking and review assignments. For PhD degrees the
external examiner is normally treated as the senior person, regardless of
academic rank, and has the final say-so (there are often two externals for a
PhD). This is similar to the US system of a PhD committee except that the
external person is utterly independent. It may well, of course, be different
in other countries.
I suggest that we could make a start on improving our standards by the
Society keeping, and making known via SDR, a list of people recommended as
external examiners who could be invited to serve on US PhD committees or to
do the normal external examining in UK-based systems. A variant on such a
system might be useful elsewhere. The key idea would be for the persons on
the list to be nominated by national chapters who cold be expected to know
the system in their own countries.
I hope that helps.
Regards,
Geoff
Professor R G Coyle,
Consultant in System Dynamics and Strategic Modelling,
Telephone +44 (0) 1793 782817, Fax ... 783188
email geoff.coyle@btinternet.com
The idea of SD certification is a very interesting issue but it might be
fraught with difficulty.
One precedent is that the Operational Research Society (which has around
5000 members world-wide) argued for at least 15 years over the establishment
of the Fellowship of OR - equivalent to certification. Eventually a
sub-group set up a Fellowship scheme of their own but it was never
recognised by the Society and seems to have been of little practical
benefit. Maybe someone will know better, but thats my assessment. The
implication may be that our society would achieve no better outcome.
A second potential problem is the legal aspect. People such as medical
doctors, architects and the like are allowed to practice as such by
authorities which derive their legitimacy from the government. A doctor can
be struck off for malpractice and that is effectively by the authority of
the State. This is based on the need to protect the public against the
potentially serious consequences of incompetence. There are no such
consequences from the malpractice of SD. Further, I can see the prospect of
deep trouble if Bloggs is told by a self-appointed body that he is not an
acceptable system dynamicist. He might well have grounds to sue, as
individual persons, the members of the committee which had assessed him to
be incompetent. I think that there would be a need to take some serious
(and probably expensive) legal advice which would have to allow for legal
systems in many countries.
Thirdly, how a subject is taught can be influenced very heavily by how
universities require examinations to be conducted. That differs so widely
from one country to another (and we have members in no fewer than 55
countries from Argentina to Vietnam) that I shudder to think of the
complexity.
A more positive idea is the role of external examiners. In most countries
which have British-derived education systems, and maybe others, university
exams are moderated by external assessors. For written exams, they review
the questions to be set, and can over-rule the person who set them, they
then evaluate the marking and review assignments. For PhD degrees the
external examiner is normally treated as the senior person, regardless of
academic rank, and has the final say-so (there are often two externals for a
PhD). This is similar to the US system of a PhD committee except that the
external person is utterly independent. It may well, of course, be different
in other countries.
I suggest that we could make a start on improving our standards by the
Society keeping, and making known via SDR, a list of people recommended as
external examiners who could be invited to serve on US PhD committees or to
do the normal external examining in UK-based systems. A variant on such a
system might be useful elsewhere. The key idea would be for the persons on
the list to be nominated by national chapters who cold be expected to know
the system in their own countries.
I hope that helps.
Regards,
Geoff
Professor R G Coyle,
Consultant in System Dynamics and Strategic Modelling,
Telephone +44 (0) 1793 782817, Fax ... 783188
email geoff.coyle@btinternet.com