J Henry Phillips
Austin, TX 78753


Ann Macfarlane, Terry Hanlen, Walter "Mooch" Bacack Muriel Jérôme O'Keefe Jeff Sanfaçon

Dear Ann Macfarlane,

There are a few things I have to point out before the accreditation program is hastily gutted and ruined. Please correct me on any point of fact on which I am in error.

1. The Hamm report evidently errs about the meaning of the term accredit/accreditation. According to the Random House Unabridged accredit means:

1. to ascribe or attribute to (usually fol. by with ) : He was accredited with having said it. 2. to attribute or ascribe; consider as belonging: an invention accredited to Edison. 3. to provide or send with credentials; designate officially: to accredit an envoy. 4. to certify (a school, college, or the like) as meeting all formal official requirements of academic excellence, curriculum, facilities, etc. 5. to make authoritative, creditable, or reputable; sanction. 6. to regard as true; believe.

An envoy is by definition an individual, so the term is in no way restricted to describing organizations. If ignoring every definition save number 4 is honest by your ethical standards, please come out and say so.

The Hamm report states: "The first issue that ATA should address is the fundamental question of the level of your certification program. Is your certification an entry level or advanced examination? This issue is fundamental in publicizing, preparing and defending any certification program. Also, all language chairs and graders should be aware of this principle or philosophy."

Further: "Every certification program needs some strategic direction. One major strategic issue is the question of the level of the credential."

Nowhere in the so-called Executive Report do I find any shadow of either statement, and I notice you were very careful to exclude any mention of this issue from your presentation. My question then is this:

Do you believe it is honest to present to the membership a summary of the Hamm report which evades mention of "The first issue that ATA should address," "the fundamental question" and the "major strategic issue" pointed to by Hamm himself in his report?

Cordially yours,