None of this is a bad thing. Generally, the goal of certification is to establish a minimum set of skills, knowledge, and attitudes (KSAs), outline educational requirements, and encourage continuous learning through continuing education units/credits. Many employers use the provincial credential as a minimum hiring standard and, in some cases, funders have considered making certification a requirement for various funded projects.
However, at a January meeting focused on CDP training needs, an interesting question emerged – Does certification result in more highly-skilled practitioners and, therefore, better service to clients? It was agreed that, as many employers are considering certification as a minimum (or at least preferred) hiring standard, there must be at least some anecdotal evidence. However, none of the meeting attendees were aware of any research or indication that certified CDPs were "better" than those who were not certified.
This question piqued my curiosity and I took the opportunity to connect with several colleagues during CANNEXUS 2014 to explore it further. Although I only spoke to a few people, the general consensus seemed to be that no one is tracking how, or if, certification impacts practice. At least one contact I spoke to mentioned there was no difference between staff who were certified and staff who were not.
On the surface, the answer to the question, “Does certification result in more highly-skilled practitioners and, therefore, better service to clients?” seems to be no but I think this warrants further investigation. I’d love to hear what readers think; feel free to add a comment in the space provided.
Of course, the other question may be whether or not the goal of certification is to improve practice and, if improved practice isn’t the goal, then what is?