What is your opinion on this question: if a person has or is doing a Masters in GIS, should he or she also pursue the URISA GIS Certification??? I have seen a lot of professionals with much higher degrees in GIS than a certification, but in their profiles, they only present themselves as GISP. I think that this certification is becoming more like a trend and is not really making the correct used of the term Professional. In most disciplines, you add the suffix “Professional” when you achieve an official license after passing an exam validated by a Department of State. So, when URISA came at the beginning with the GISP, it was nice because at that moment, there weren’t many certifications nor degrees. But nowadays, I feel that URISA has taken ownership of the term, and a lot of GIS people, thinks that a GISP is like the ultimate GIS goal. And you see a lot of job posts adding the GISP requirements. How can you require something that was created by an association?
I mean, let’s say that the US finally comes with a Professional License in GIS, what will the suffix after your last name??? And if a person has a professional license in GIS and the URISA GIS certification, will they put GISP, GISP after their names? I think that URISA should start renaming the acronym of their certification to a more accurate term like GISCERT or GISCIT or some term that really reflect that the acronym is a certification and not a professional degree.
Now, this is just an opinion, I might be wrong, what are your thoughts about this?