BCMA suspended? Does anyone know why?

Just my $.02 here. I've been in tree work for 4 years now. I have an associates degree in Arboriculture and landscape management. I've aspired to get my cert since I left school but to be honest, have seen no true benefit to obtaining it. 99% of people outside the field have never heard of it and those that at least know what an arborist is define it as "oh, so you cut trees down." It might be the market that I live in but it seems that homeowners aren't interested in tree care, just removals or pruning. I want to obtain the credential in order to maintain the knowledge but when I see that tree i.d. isn't even part of the exam, I can't help but wonder just how legitimate the exam really is. Not requiring a CA to be able to identify tree species is like not requiring a doctor to be able to identify body parts. The bottom line, however unfortunate, is the great and almighty dollar. Where's the incentive for the employer to spend hundreds of dollars for an employee to take the exam and maintain the certification if it doesn't affect their bottom line? They can't charge more per hour based on the fact a CA is on the job site. I'd like to see legislation passed that requires a certification. You need a license to cut hair but not to work on trees. Sorry to derail from the original post
 
Last edited:
So I'm Australian and I'd like to share what we have here.

ISA is so little, here, though I'm ISA certified myself.. Instead, it's all about qualifications rather than certification. That makes it a lot tougher.

To be a qualified climbing arborist one has to do a certificate course in climbing. To be a consulting arborist is a diploma level course, what you would call an associate degree. I think our system is a lot harder, but definitely better.

The only problem we have is that anyone can call themselves a tree worker or even an arborist, none of it is regulated except if they say they are qualified. I'd like to see the authorities say everyone has a year or two to be qualified (or to obtain recognition of prior knowledge/experience through testing) and then only qualified people can work. Of course, that's because I believe that would be in my own best financial interests. Barriers to entry are profitable to people already in a trade/profession.

On the other hand, with such a system in place newbies would be much safer. I have to wonder how I didn't get badly injured when I started out with no training.
 
Welcome to the Brisbaner; cool town you are in!

O and GreenMtn; Tree ID is still in the exam; it's just more general taxonomy and less specifics, to make the test more universal and consistent. And I know a recent BCMA in VT, rfwoodvt, who says it pays for him to get and keep it.

True, some markets seem too primitive for cert to pay, but this is a chicken-egg thing really. Getting certified and raising your game can influence the market and pull it up. In 1992 when i got certified, topping ads in our phone book outnumbered CA's by 10:1. now that ratio is reversed.

So don't wait for your market to change before pulling yourself up to meet it! Even if it does, that would make you the tail getting wagged by the dog, huh?
 
Excellent response Guy! I was comtemplating such a response also. People have to realize the CA credential is a worldwide credential. Things are different in Australia or Europe or Brazil. We mustn't limit ourselves to our local market areas. Something even old dogs like us must learn and realize this to be relevant today.
 
The biggest reason ID in the exam was changed (as I watched it happen while on the Ed committee): not enough arborists brought in samples to examine, or took the time to make those samples consistent enough to make the test fair. Then you have deciduosity and other seasonal variables...

"They can't charge more per hour based on the fact a CA is on the job site." Actually in many cases they can. ;)
 
"the company that administers the BCMA test, Pearson, has been under lots of scrutiny lately. They are one of the largest standardized testing groups in the country. Watch last Sunday's episode of John Oliver's show Last Week Tonight on HBO. Eye opening expose of Pearson. Possibly related."
 
I doubt that they are revising it to make it harder. So that leaves only one option. Could it be that a lot of people bitch that it is too hard?
 
Pearson's shutdown is causing kids to take end of year tests with paper and pencil (gasp).
But Pearson's problems don't seem to explain a 6-month hiatus.

No one's complained of difficulty--that would be an admission of lack of knowledge; not compatible with the big ego that it takes to try the test. (Mine was huge, and I missed a lot of ?s).

Several recent takers complained the questions were too hard to follow.
 
The questions are worded horribly indeed. ISA implies that this is the highest quality credential an arborist can hold. I expected the questions to be high quality in turn. Some of the questions were incoherent at best. The questions seemed almost amateur.

Another issue is that some of the sources for the material are no longer in print. That part seems a little unfair. I recognized questions from a particular book that is not even available anymore. Luckily I have access to a pretty extensive library of that stuff but would imagine that this is seldom the case. If I didn't have those books, I have no idea where to find the answers to those questions. I guess its for those reasons that you are able to leave them comments on the questions.
 
senones I'm glad to hear you can leave comments--I left 3 legal pad pages full.

What books are you referring to? If out of print, then the content might be found in another place or format.

Sorry to hear about the questions; it's a tough job to write them, but still they should be coherent. I look at the CEU article questions, and usually 2-3-4 out of 20 seem to have structural issues. But then I look again and find out I missed something on 1 or 2. Not fair to be quick to judge.

When I wrote CEU ?s I was told that I made them too hard, then i saw some gimme questions get substituted. kinda frustrating; like 'Who's buried in Shigo's tomb' kind of stuff.

Greg we already heard from the Marketing Dept.; "With our committment to quality programs, continuous improvements, and customer satisifaction, this decision will allow time to work on improving the overall exam experience and provide a more fluid transition to a new exam in late 2015." Sounds like they are selling soap.

if you want facts, try asking a board member. or just read between the lines.
 
I just gotta toss my $.02 in. To preface, I’ve been certified since 1999, it took me two tries to pass (both times I got high 60% range before passing) and I grew up in the industry. I took a test with actual samples (thank you Steve Geist) and it wasn’t too hard. Neither were Guy’s CEU questions.

The ISA has made leaps and bounds in the last 15 years in promoting the CA. Now even in my little market folks ask about being a CA. Here’s the problem; they let guys test who haven’t been journeymen. It’s supposed to be a two year experience to test. There’s guys out there who started a tree biz, then realized it helped to be a CA (for marketing) and the ISA let them test! Just because you can buy a chipper and a saw and make money off tree work does not make you qualified to test for a CA. This watered down the certification. Leaving those of us who did our time and were journeymen, learning from the wiser CA’s before testing, looking at the process like WTF! Then some guys said, “OK fine I’ll prove I’m a step above them and take the BCMA”. Now the ISA is suspending it because there’s not enough interest?
I personally was and still am on the fence. I could probably pass the BCMA but, is it going to have any ROI? It’s taken the ISA about 12 years IMO to water down the CA. I asked myself, is that what is going to happen with the BCMA? I hope they keep it the same and just worry less about participation (AKA money) and more about doing right for the industry. Seems to me the journeyman to master process works in other trades, it just needs to be overseen correctly. What if instead of the whole two years experience we went to having a BCMA nominate you to test? Then guys like me who wanted my staff to be CA’s would have to be BCMA’s. And what if the ISA gave guys like me a little break on the cost of the test for the BCMA? I mean I’ve recertified five times to the tune of $100, plus the initial test fee of $100 (=$600). I’ve paid my membership and regional membership for 18 years, that’s another $2700 there. I’ve bought numerous items off the ISA store, to further my knowledge and my employees. I’ve included their logo in numerous articles and ads, had them on our trucks, and on our website. I believe there’s been 6-8 guys our organization influenced to become CA’s. Does that not warrant a break on the test?

Anyway if they bring it back I’ll more than likely become a BCMA, regardless of cost. I still believe it’s better than the alternative.
 
An update: documentation of qualifying experience for all certs is being tightened up. Previously on the honor system pretty much, now signatures and verifiability are required.
This was a common complaint, so it's nice seeing the certs getting strengthened in this way.

For all you Certified Arborists, consider a truck decal--I get a lot of attention from my BCMA decal which costs $30. CA decals now only cost $15! Good for covering small dents too. ;)
 
That one really pissed me off.. The person who brought me into tree work died from a working accident. I had 3 years with him, but had to wait to take the test because over the phone they would not accept that experience since it couldn't be verified. I had two other Certified Arborists willing to vouch for me, along with his wife, but apparently that was unacceptable. Then when I finally had variable work history enough to take the exam, they NEVER even called to check.
I'm still pissed about it, and when I asked questions about it at the Portland conference in person the answer was "Well is is all an honor based system, that is covered in the code of ethics" Screw that!
 
evo, that's a sad story. The phone is a great tool, but not my first choice for those communications; the person on the other end is kind of put on the spot, and will tend to err on the side of defendability.
Sounds like you tried too hard for your own good to be legit!
If you had 3 years of pay stubs, what vouching was needed?
Anyway I hope all's well that ends well. And the process itself will be more verifiable from now on.
 
GlennButler said:
Too many arborists are afflicted with Dunning-Kruger. Anti-intellectualism is a trademark of our industry. It's not going to change anytime soon unless we change our priorities as a culture. We need less fascination with football and boxing and improved funding for public education. For our industry to improve, elementary school students need a better grasp and appreciation of ecology. Environmental ignorance and indifference pervades our current crop of customers.

For me, the Certified Arborist designation was a license to learn and no more. I view the knowledge obtained from preparation for the CA exam to be a bare minimum to practice responsible tree care. I've been a BCMA since the test was first available and I still consider my knowledge paltry and in need of continuous updating and improvement. I expect the ISA to not reduce the rigor of the exam.
Click to expand...

Glen, you really hit the nail on the head with this in so many areas. So many times when I've thought about standards in the industry, our societal views and impact on trees, and safety, wages, and training in our industry it always comes down to one thing. Our society doesn't value or connect with the natural world and we view ourselves as separate from it. Knowledge and scientific understanding of nature is nothing if we view nature as something we are separate of. Those who try and change that are the heros of our world. Connect people to nature and they will value the stewards of it. Until that changes, change in our industry will be slow to come whether that be educational standards, safety standards and work practices, and the removal vs preservation slant of the industry.
 
Last edited:
We face a lot of challenges as an industry. One is obviously educating the public to the value of trees and holistic tree care. Another is the disconnect between a knowledge and understanding of trees and their processes vs the knowledge and understanding of climbing and rigging.
I came into this industry as a rock climber and as such, I quickly picked up climbing and rigging and very much biased my learning in the industry towards that. I cared far more about new gear and techniques than I did about furthering my understanding of tree biology and biomechanics. From what I've observed, this is fairly common. It took me 6 years (and going out on my own) to really start to view these two sides as equal or complimentary. The irony to me, is that the single biggest jump I've experienced in pruning speed and efficiency was a direct result of increasing my knowledge of tree biology. The more you understand about the effects your cuts will have, the less time you will have to spend deliberating about what cuts you should (or shouldn't) make while pruning. If we, as climbers, spent as much time working on the intellectual side as we do the physical, the better our industry would be.
 
I just took the bcma and passed. I failed on my first attempt by like 2 or 4 points. I personally didnt think the test was hard. The hardest part was acquinting myself with things I have never done. Personally i think it needs to be harder. I didnt have to work that hard to pass. The harder something is the more valued it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom