The issue of certification is a crucial one for psychologists. The advantages of such certification might seem to be a sanctioned status in the community, a specific set of courses for students leading to a specific title, and possibly an edge in a highly competitive job market. But the sort of training implied by certification implies learning a very specific set of skills, for very specific problems, which are transferable and will lead to precise performance and predictable outcomes. It suggests a technology, and with it the related tendency to obsolescence. Education, on the other hand, involves being informed about the current state of knowledge, whatever it is, and knowing how to stay informed. It implies that what is transferable are not specific skills but non-specific competencies. Training suggests professionals, specialization and licensing. Education suggests inquiry, adaptability, flexibility, and cross-disciplinary fertilization, which are hard to license. In the long run, education, not training, is what community psychologists need, and it is in this direction--not that of training and certification--that future programs should move. (Author/BP)