CFLE in 1989–90
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 The NCFR Board had voted to phase out the CFLE program over a period of 5 years (effective January 1996); to declare a moratorium on marketing the CFLE program, starting June 1990; and to cease certification reviews in February 1991. By the November 1990 Board meeting, a “Members Speak Out about CFLE” brief and proposal were sent to the President and Executive Committee. Seven arguments were made on behalf of the CFLE program:
- ¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0
- CFLE is just beginning to grow and will increase as graduating students become CFLEs. CFLE needs to be given a “fair time test.”
- CFLE certification is a serious need in U.S. school systems. Cancellation is a death blow to attracting educators to NCFR. Cancellation erases NCFR’s image of support to family life education.
- In the 1989 survey, 70% of CFLEs agreed the program would grow and gain recognition.
- Credentialing CFLEs adds credibility to NCFR and to those in positions that support families and children.
- Loss of money paid for credentialing that is canceled is unfair. Raise annual CFLE fees from $20 to $30–$40/year. Applied support for CFLE is needed, not just research.
- CFLE gave reasons to psychologists, family therapists, and sociologists to join NCFR
- Might NCFR be sued and/or defamed for not fulfilling its obligations in establishing the CFLE certification?
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 The proposal contained the following suggestions:
- ¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0
- Request that university academics/practitioners form a consortium for review of CFLE standards. Applications for certification and recertification would also be submitted to the consortium and then to NCFR for approval. Several universities are sending proposals to NCFR to outline how this could be accomplished with attention given to quality control.
- Certification fees should cover duplication of materials, issuance of certificates, record keeping by NCFR, and contacts with consortium of academics/practitioners.
- NCFR would profit from distribution of CFLE materials needed by prospective CFLEs, educators using the family life education pamphlets and books.
- Consult annually with a marketing expert regarding next period’s plan for CFLE marketing to avoid having to hire a full-time director.
¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 1 A task force, led by Education and Enrichment chair Judith Myers-Walls, was assigned to look at the program and to study ways that the program could become self-sustaining. Committee members included Britton Wood, Carol Rubino, Steve Jorgensen, Virginia Anderson, and Bill Meredith. The task force submitted a plan to revise the application process and move department to break-even point. The task force report was submitted for vote at the spring 1991 Board meeting. A grassroots committee led by Steve Bollman and Carol Mertens was also formed.
This was my first NCFR Board meeting. I was just in the “elect” position, but my predecessor was not available to attend. There were former NCFR presidents–the biggest names in the field–sitting all around the perimeter of the room, wanting to see what would happen at this critical time. Then I was placed in a leadership position of this Task Force, entrusted to take action to heal an ailing organization. I was quite intimidated! It was a great experience to work with the Task Force members, however, and we worked hard to find answers that would meet the needs of as many as possible. I am so glad the CFLE patient flourished!