I have been following the string and I see the issue from a different perspective. I have always found it difficult to find qualified and registered techs and have been training science degreed individuals as bench techs for several years. I think the issue is identifying the proper individual to add to your team. Technical skill is important, but attitude, aptitude, desire and how they will ultimately fit into and what they will add to the team are by far more important. The question that may be better to ask is "How do you cut a section and why do you cut a section?". Just being able to "cut" a section is not necessarily going to give you enough information to decide if the individual really fits into the team, no better yet, fit into your culture. Hiring an individual that does not fit into your lab/company and can fully support and promote the mission, vision and goals, will not help you. Why this is now becoming more of an issue may be due to the fact that with the shortage of techs in Histology, the situation exists where we have close to full employment of all registered and qualified techs. When that situation occurs, there will be more opportunities for less skill qualified individuals to obtain employment. I would not go so far as to call less skillful techs "imposters" or "false", but maybe book smart and not skill smart. Hiring an individual to perform to the quality and productivity standards of the lab requires significant investment of time to train. Now the catch 22 starts, you must invest time to properly add to your team and you do not believe you have time to invest. Once you bring a new member into your team, there is a cycle (training, functionality and competency) that must take place. You must identify were an individual fits into that cycle and how much time will be required to move them to competency. I have seen both skill qualified and non-skill qualified candidates take the same time to reach functionality. Again, I believe attitude is more key than technical skill. Without the proper attitude you will not quickly reach functionality and functionality allows you to gain time. Competency is the end goal, but functionality is the first critical step. To properly move through the cycle you must have a detailed, documented and functional training process. This whole discussion speaks to me that there is a lack of written and documented standardized training (it works for MT's) and to develop standardized training you must have standardized procedures and techniques (you knew I would work this into the discussion). The degree of difficulty of an individual to meet the quality and productivity requirements of the lab depends on the amount of standardization in the lab. Couple a standardized process with attitude and desire and you can quickly develop a new hire into a fully functioning member of the team. I believe that is the real goal and that will help Histotechnology progress. Is attitude, aptitude and desire really exposed when you ask a candidate "can you cut a section"?
William DeSalvo, B.S., HTL(ASCP) > Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 14:14:54 +0000 > From: koelli...@comcast.net > To: akbitt...@geisinger.edu > Subject: Re: [Histonet] interview cutting-OT-disarmingly long for > deletiondisinterested > CC: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu > > Fascinating... and that gets me back to my original ponderance. Why all the > "false" histotechs? Are there people trying to sneak into flow cytometry who > have never run a flow cytometer or clinical chemistry medtechs who have never > sat in front of an analyzer or cytotechs who don't know an epithelial cell > from a glandular cell. What is the reason that there seems to be so much > trouble now with non-functioning or poorly functioning histotechs or outright > imposters? Maybe there is an answer 2 or 3 levels globally deeper in health > care and society than the simple question of "Can you cut a section at > interview?" > Ray > Seattle > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Angela Bitting" <akbitt...@geisinger.edu> > To: "Thomas Jasper" <tjas...@copc.net>, "Kim Donadio" > <one_angel_sec...@yahoo.com> > Cc: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu > Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 5:36:53 AM > Subject: Re: [Histonet] interview cutting-OT-disarmingly long for > deletiondisinterested > > I've had a temp, who we interviewed over the phone, come in and sit down at a > microtome and create the most horrendous slides I've ever seen. He lasted a > week and we sent him back from whence he came. I don't think he was EVER a > Histotech or if he was it was many, many moons ago. Point is.....he snowed us > all during the interview. Just thought I'd throw that out there. > > >>> Kim Donadio <one_angel_sec...@yahoo.com> 1/30/2012 10:01 PM >>> > Oh come on. The truth of the matter of why I like to give a manual test to > new hires is because people are graduating some Internet programs without the > technical skills to function in a lab. Not all. But I've seen a lot. Just > saying:) > > I don't think it should be made a big deal. You take a drivers test to drive. > Peoples lives are on the line in each case. > > Does that a lone mean I don't hire them. Probaly not. I just need to know how > much personal investment of my time I am going to need to give ...... > > Runs for her pillow of dreams :). Nite nite > Kim > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jan 28, 2012, at 4:25 PM, "Thomas Jasper" <tjas...@copc.net> wrote: > > > Ray, > > > > Took the time to read your post. You make excellent points. Getting at the > > gist of your "wannabee" comments. What boggles my mind is - how or why > > someone would try to pull something off like that. Sooner or later > > (hopefully sooner...like before actually hiring them) the charade will be > > discovered. Misrepresenting oneself and false or misleading information > > given on an application is generally grounds for dismissal. > > > > Seems to me this isn't Leonardo di Caprio and "Catch Me If You Can". In the > > end you are right about finding ways to determine if an applicant is > > "legit". I've come to believe that in the Histology world - if you meet or > > hear of someone you don't know...someone you do know...knows them. At least > > that seems to be true almost all the time. > > > > Kind regards, > > Tom Jasper > > > > Thomas Jasper HT (ASCP) BAS > > Histology Supervisor > > Central Oregon Regional Pathology Services > > Bend, OR 97701 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu > > [mailto:histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of > > koelli...@comcast.net > > Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 10:23 AM > > To: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu > > Subject: [Histonet] interview cutting-OT-disarmingly long for > > deletiondisinterested > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or as Gayle wisely pointed out it might be interview sectioning to > > differentiate those who "cut out" on an interview. > > > > > > While there is no right or wrong to this question, I'm still not convinced > > that it is a useful tool for you or HR to just have a routine "can cut > > (section) on rotary microtome" check box on application the same as you do > > for a "current address" or "reference contact" check box on a form. As I > > pointed out in my original stupid reply, willfully breaking my own internal > > rule to avoid taking up these gray (not black and white scientific) > > discussions, it would depend on the circumstance (unknown person from > > unknown parts vs. someone from part of the "histology community" well > > known). If I call "x" who I've known for years about an applicant "y" who > > is applying and worked with "x" and am told "Oh! "y" worked for us for last > > 4 years. He/she along with "z" and "zz" were our 3 who sectioned (#) blocks > > a day. Devastated to see him/her go but know they had to move along with > > husband/wife. Great cutter and everyone liked him/her". Having him/her sit > > down to now cut 10 blocks to see "if they can cut" as a routine question > > accomplishes WHAT?" If someone mysterious with no background walked in, > > sure have them cut although there have been numerous fantastic options > > already posted how to weed them out prior to sectioning a finger off. A > > (purposely) mis-processed block with tissue now shrunken in from block face > > and a question of "we need a recut, what would you do for this block" will > > let you know in about 2 seconds whether or not this is a histotech > > impostor. Or looking at a blandly stained, necrotic section under > > microscope and asking "interpret this section" will tell you something of > > who or what this person is. Personally, I'd far rather have a person who is > > energetic, scientifically and intellectually confident and talented, > > personable, works well within the "symphony" of histology and cuts 8 blocks > > and leaves a few wrinkles in this new environment set-up than a (female or > > male) diva who cuts 10 perfect blocks but who has that nearly imperceptible > > tint of not a complete team player or dubious personality. A routine check > > box "can cut" I think is just a waste of time and resources unless a > > particular circumstance warrants it. > > > > > > Someone asked "would you hire a secretary without a wpm typing test". > > Absolutely, beyond any doubt. If the transcriptionist next door wants a > > secretary position and routinely types 3 times faster than is required as a > > secretary; why a wpm test? If I call someone I know across state where this > > applicant worked for last 10 years and "she's an immaculate and fast typist > > beyond anything we've ever had and so sorry she had to move", I'd rather > > then concentrate on more esoteric matrices than wpm. If he/she was a > > secretary 25 years ago and has been a house-husband or house-wife for 25 > > years and starting back now or if someone walks in off the street to apply > > then beyond any doubt; they take a typing test. > > > > > > Someone pointed out that all musicians play their instrument in application > > to test for the orchestra. Of course but for a completely different reason. > > You could give an "oral test" to 1,000 musicians of which 999 would know > > how to transpose 3 pitches up by 7 semi-tones or define a diatonic scale or > > identify the composer if listening to an excerpt from the > > Overture-Midsummers Night Dream. That's not what the interviewee is looking > > for. They are looking for the ONE in 1,000 who has the exact pitch, timbre, > > affannato, vibrato, arioso and legato from their specific instrument that > > only that particular person's instrument and ability possesses. Only a > > finely trained ear (the conductor) has that God-given ability of > > relative/perfect pitch or undefinable gift to identify that one instrument > > and one ability to fit into the total music experience. And there is only > > one way to find out; have him or her play. Totally different scenario than > > in a histology lab unless the object is to see how well the speed and noise > > of one person's cutting blends in with the symphony of 75 other microtomes > > being used in the lab at the same time. > > > > > > Then you start to ponder, as did a fine mind out there who understood the > > butterfly comment, if a current 30-year superstar of histology walked into > > a lab looking for a histology job, would they take a cutting ( sectioning?) > > test? If Yo-Yo Ma or James Galway or Itzhak Perlman or John Cerminaro had > > ever walked in to "test" for an orchestral position, surely they wouldn't > > be tested just to see if "can they play" a cello or flute or violin or > > French Horn or even how well they play on that particular day in that > > particular environment. > > > > > > Maybe what I'm mis-understanding is that apparently there are A LOT of > > histology wannabees, walking in off the street trying to "sneak into > > histology"? and if so that seems like there should be some manner of > > response to that situation although not sure what it is. But something > > short of sitting down to cut and have them slice a finger. And if > > accredited histology schools are putting out graduated students with HT > > certifications, and have never cut a block or only 3 blocks or trained to > > routinely cut thick and thin, then that seems a matter for the school, NSH, > > NACCLS, ASCP, CAP, state agencies, etc and not the histonet. > > > > > > In the end, I think there are potentially far better ways (and there have > > been numerous great suggestions already) to ascertain information about an > > applicant than a routine (check-accomplished cutting 10 blocks) check-off > > box although depending on the situation, I'm not at all against cutting > > blocks at application if warranted. > > > > > > If the Samurai Pathologist is out there reading still; any idea over your > > career, about how many glass slides have you viewed under a microscope > > since the first? Your replies are always top-notch, entertaining and > > informative. And hope with each new job you don't have to show someone you > > can pass a test of which slide shows normal liver and which slide shows > > cirrhotic liver in your interview. > > > > > > One day about a year ago, I sat down and did some fairly accurate (I think) > > estimation of "how many blocks have I cut in 45 years in pathology" . Came > > up with a number a bit above 1,100,000 blocks (paraffin, frozen OCT, glycol > > methacrylate, EPON). So if I come looking for a bench histology job, hope I > > can skip the routine, required "can section?" check box. Would rather spend > > the time talking about the greatest sports franchise in the history of all > > sports; The St. Louis Baseball Cardinals. Summer of 1967 cut my first > > paraffin block while on high school summer break (after a few weeks > > learning to hone my steel knife with a Belgian stone and > > sharpening/stropping with a barber razor strop). And in summer of 1967 I > > also watched an unhitable Bob Gibson lead the Cards to yet another World > > Series. > > > > > > Ray > > Phenopath Labs > > Seattle WA > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Histonet mailing list > > Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu > > http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Histonet mailing list > > Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu > > http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet > > _______________________________________________ > Histonet mailing list > Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu > http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet > > > IMPORTANT WARNING: The information in this message (and the documents > attached to it, if any) is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is > intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is > unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, > distribution or any action taken, or omitted to be taken, in reliance on it > is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this message in > error, please delete all electronic copies of this message (and the documents > attached to it, if any), destroy any hard copies you may have created and > notify me immediately by replying to this email. Thank you. > > Geisinger Health System utilizes an encryption process to safeguard Protected > Health Information and other confidential data contained in external e-mail > messages. If email is encrypted, the recipient will receive an e-mail > instructing them to sign on to the Geisinger Health System Secure E-mail > Message Center to retrieve the encrypted e-mail. > _______________________________________________ > Histonet mailing list > Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu > http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet > _______________________________________________ > Histonet mailing list > Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu > http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet _______________________________________________ Histonet mailing list Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
