{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020442930153321975, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.964467005076142, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Should AEA Begin a Process for Restricting Membership in the Profession of Evaluation?

In this paper I present an argument supporting the position that AEA should not undertake a certification or similar process at the present time, even though I believe the public needs some type of protection from unscrupulous and incompetent evaluators. The problems a certification process would solve have not been substantiated; the public may not support such an endeavor; “evaluation” is not clearly defined, which means the knowledge and skills (K/S) unique to its practice and performance criteria are not agreed upon; and the process for putting a certification system into place is a very complex and costly undertaking (e.g., ensuring the accuracy and integrity of determining who does and does not have the requisite K/S and who is applying them in an effective manner). In addition, certification would require establishing some way to decertify incompetent practitioners, and being able to defend all of these actions when there is disagreement and even litigation. I believe that AEA is not likely to be able to do these things in an effective manner, in the near future.