State Practical Exam

[hcjilson]

Cindy, 50% fail because 50% don't have the practical knowledge to pass-period.If they had had the proper training it follows they would have passed. I think it is proper to place the blame equally between the educators, and the companies who are training opticians.....as well as the students themselves.It is the students responsibility to know what he has been told will be on the test. It is the educators responsibility to teach those things.

Jon,
You cannot honestly believe most tasks requiring practical knowledge are done differently from State to State.I would ask you how many different ways can you neutralize a lens, or ID a progressive lens, or determine decentration etc.etc.Even if there were more than one way to do it......isn't the correct result the important thing.

The question I have asked at least twice in this thread remains unanswered.Why can't the committee adopt one exam and call it the National Practical, and bring it to the states for their acceptance?
I would like the reason that this cannot be done.A simple request from one who is trying to offer some alternative to the status quo.


I would prefer not to discuss the potential legal challenges when in fact those whould be borne by the individual states.ABO ran into no such problem when the national competency test was adopted, and I wouldn't expect to see one in this case.

The history of the ABO exam is a moot point.We have accepted it....you have accepted it as a standard.Today perhaps we find that exam in need of an upgrade, but at least its a standard.If we could come up with a National Practical we would be making a huge step.

There is another alternative to what we are talking about and I'm thinking along the lines of what has been done in Nursing.For lack of a better term I will use "Mutual Regognition".I think this has as much promise as a National Practical....and may in fact be the route to travel because the states give up no soverereign rights and it will be a lot easier to sell.

Any thoughts Jon?

bst from hj

[Cindy Hamlin]

hcjilson said:
Cindy, 50% fail because 50% don't have the practical knowledge to pass-period.If they had had the proper training it follows they would have passed. I think it is proper to place the blame equally between the educators, and the companies who are training opticians.....as well as the students themselves.It is the students responsibility to know what he has been told will be on the test. It is the educators responsibility to teach those things.
bst from hj

Harry,
I don't see how this could fall on 50% of the test takers shoulders. I think the national exam will lead to schools teaching a more standardized curriculum. It has to. I just cannot wrap my mind around this failure percentage. I am staggered by it! Especially with the reports I hear back from employees in our various licensed states.

[hcjilson]

Cindy,

Like you, I was surprised at that figure but I was forced to give it some deep thought when
someone asked me what I would consider a good pass rate.I'd ask you the same question.Given a fair and comprehensive exam.(one that you agree is that)What would you consider to be a "good" pass rate.Think about that for a minute or two.And feel free to post what you think a good pass rate for a fair test is.

In June the Commonwealth of Mass held its first practical.There were 2 applicants who took the test.One passed and one did not.That was a 50% pass rate.When the count got to 10 applicants last fall, it was roughly the same story.The better trained applicants passed, the others did not.I cannot tell you how the one that failed in June did on the second test in November, but I'd almost be willing to bet they passed.The test is not difficult.We've only had 2 tests todate and a total of 12 people.Not a very large group to draw valid statistics from.

OK Cindy, times up.....what is a good pass rate?
Now I think you can see why a pass rate is not the important thing.

BTW I've lost the matchboxes I brought back from Ireland for you :( I'll see if Ian can't get you some!
hj

Wow! My thousandth post!!!!!!!:bbg:

[wmcdonald]

I find myself in this fray again; I must be getting old! I feel bad often for the apprentice/student that does not pass state or national exams. It is not totally their fault, although we certainly don't attract the best of students like we used to. Opticianry education has some excellent people involved that do a great job, but they only reach a small minority of the people that need help. Our primary method of training Opticians in this country, apprenticeship, is and has been an outdated mode of training for years. That is why most other professions did away with it long ago. I'm sure I have offended someone who was trained well through this method, but when you look at the system as a whole, it provides for too many limitations. Let me say here that I don't intend to offend that individual that was successfully trained through apprenticeship, but we must move our training into the 21st century. If standardized educational programs were our primary mode of training, we wouldn't need to worry about practical exams as much because it would have been covered in some form in class. I think that after initial classroom experiences, there must be a significant hands-on/clinical training experience as well to provide a competent, well-trained Optician. It will take a blending of the two learning experiences to reach our goal and it needs to be done under the supervision of trained educators that know how to teach. Often our "apprenticeship" is merely cheap labor. It needs to go and I hope one day we can accomplish that goal. Again, I am not here to hurt anyone feelings. There are great Opticians who trained through apprenticeship, but for consistancy as well as other professional reasons formal education is desparately needed in Opticianry.

[Cindy Hamlin]

hcjilson said:
Cindy,

Like you, I was surprised at that figure but I was forced to give it some deep thought when
someone asked me what I would consider a good pass rate.I'd ask you the same question.Given a fair and comprehensive exam.(one that you agree is that)What would you consider to be a "good" pass rate.Think about that for a minute or two.And feel free to post what you think a good pass rate for a fair test is.

In June the Commonwealth of Mass held its first practical.There were 2 applicants who took the test.One passed and one did not.That was a 50% pass rate.When the count got to 10 applicants last fall, it was roughly the same story.The better trained applicants passed, the others did not.I cannot tell you how the one that failed in June did on the second test in November, but I'd almost be willing to bet they passed.The test is not difficult.We've only had 2 tests todate and a total of 12 people.Not a very large group to draw valid statistics from.

OK Cindy, times up.....what is a good pass rate?
Now I think you can see why a pass rate is not the important thing.

BTW I've lost the matchboxes I brought back from Ireland for you :( I'll see if Ian can't get you some!
hj

Wow! My thousandth post!!!!!!!:bbg:

Harry, I would think 80% would be acceptable. I just got floored by another statistic. Only 2 people sat for the Mass boards???? And 10 the year before???

I think the pass rate is an important thing. (Are my matchbooks slipping away???) I think the pass rate is a telling number. Lets look at all the colleges in the country that have boards required for certification. I cannot believe that the real estate boards have a 50% fail rate. I cannot believe the cosmetology boards have a 50% fail rate. (I can ask my uncle about the cosmetology board fail rate of his students as he owns a beauty college in MD.)

I think the fail rate is indicative of the state of the schooling. It has to be. What else can it be? (Before you send the vicious e-mails and posts, think about it!)

I would be interested in knowing the fail rate for the FL state boards (Laurie are you there?). I know we have CT opticians here what is their fail rate?

I think the fail rate is a big deal!

Also Harry, thanks for asking Ian for the matchbooks! You are a doll to have remembered!
:D

[Cindy Hamlin]

wmcdonald said:
I find myself in this fray again; I must be getting old! I feel bad often for the apprentice/student that does not pass state or national exams. It is not totally their fault, although we certainly don't attract the best of students like we used to. Opticianry education has some excellent people involved that do a great job, but they only reach a small minority of the people that need help. Our primary method of training Opticians in this country, apprenticeship, is and has been an outdated mode of training for years. That is why most other professions did away with it long ago. I'm sure I have offended someone who was trained well through this method, but when you look at the system as a whole, it provides for too many limitations. Let me say here that I don't intend to offend that individual that was successfully trained through apprenticeship, but we must move our training into the 21st century. If standardized educational programs were our primary mode of training, we wouldn't need to worry about practical exams as much because it would have been covered in some form in class. I think that after initial classroom experiences, there must be a significant hands-on/clinical training experience as well to provide a competent, well-trained Optician. It will take a blending of the two learning experiences to reach our goal and it needs to be done under the supervision of trained educators that know how to teach. Often our "apprenticeship" is merely cheap labor. It needs to go and I hope one day we can accomplish that goal. Again, I am not here to hurt anyone feelings. There are great Opticians who trained through apprenticeship, but for consistancy as well as other professional reasons formal education is desparately needed in Opticianry.

Mr McDonald,
Let me start this by saying I was a graduate of the Virginia Opticianry program. I am wondering if the apprenticeship program is administered differently in different states.

Let me tell you what I did in VA and you can tell me if this is the apprenticeship you are referring to. (Harry chime in to if this is the way Mass does it.)

1. 3 years of registered apprentice work under the supervision of a licensed optician and registered with the Department of Labor.
2. 3 years at a technical college learning optical related instruction.
3. High School Graduation or GED.
4. Graduation with passing marks from that same program.

After I accomplished all of these, I was permitted to sit for the state board. Is that what the apprenticeship program you refer to in your post entails?

Sorry to keep beating this horse, but I didn't think the VA practical was hard at all. Then again I had teachers who made sure I learned and comprehended!

[Cindy Hamlin]

x

[hcjilson]

Cindy,
I appreciate your frustration, and I'll show you a way out of it....BUT I have to put you on the spot to do that.
What would you consider a good pass rate?
Next question:
Would it not be easier for you in your position, to be able to hire someone from say PA to cover one of your stores in southern NJ? Or be able to ship the PA person to Dartmouth MA to cover an in an emergency as long as you knew licensing would not be a problem.Or to bring a promising employee to work in VA so you could get a closer look at them while not having to worry about their credentials.Remember the case of Jackie O down east who married a Naval officer and she moved to VA.This talented optician was made to jump through the hoops so she could practice in Virginia.That to me is incredidble, yet it goes on all over the country.A solution to this problem exists right now....in an allied health profession with a whole lot more life threatening situations than we as an industry will ever see.Are you interested in learning about it?
More importantly, is Jon interested in learning about it? (he IS the person that can do something about it...)
If anyone is interested I have a website at the office I think can give us the blueprint by which we just might be able to accomplish the goal of being accepted across state lines.If that happens there won't be any need for a National practical.

Just let me know......hj(i'm gone for the night but will pick up tomorrow)

[MVEYES]

You have pointed out very clearly what our main focus should be:

If standardized educational programs were our primary mode of training, we wouldn't need to worry about practical exams as much because it would have been covered in some form in class. I think that after initial classroom experiences, there must be a significant hands-on/clinical training experience as well to provide a competent, well-trained Optician. It will take a blending of the two learning experiences to reach our goal and it needs to be done under the supervision of trained educators that know how to teach. Often our "apprenticeship" is merely cheap labor. It needs to go and I hope one day we can accomplish that goal.

These ideas are exactly what anyone who wants to be an "Optician" should agree that the momentum of our energy should be focused toward. I think we are all in agreement here that formal education takes us to our destination. Pass rates on exams or practicals only show the caliber of the student and how much preparation that student put into the material being tested. If you group formally educated students with those who are educated through apprenticeship, you should see some differences. Get statistics of those who passed and were educated in a two year opticianry program. Compare that with apprentice trained individuals' pass rate and you could make judgements about the exams. Each of the requirements that the state puts on the individual should have equal weight. But like Warren pointed out:

Often our "apprenticeship" is merely cheap labor.

:cheers: Jerry

[Joann Raytar]

Harry J,

Out of curiosity, does Mass. have an accredited Opticianry Program?

[Jon Bright]

Harry,
Let me start by saying I do not personally believe that we neutralize lenses differently from state to state! I HAVE NEVER SAID THAT, AND I DON"T BELIEVE I EVER WILL! I think it might be time to update you on how we started down this path. I was appointed to oversee our practical exam and when I proctored my first exam I could not believe some of the tasks that were being asked of the candidates. These tasks were part of the exam because of well meaning people like you! They didn't have facts they just said they thought opticians should know how to do them. It didn't matter if they were part of the everyday tasks that opticians are required to perform. At about the same time I was asked to decide if Licensed Opticians from other states (that were applying for licensure in Va.) had met the Va. requirements for licensure. One of the requirements was to have passed a substantially equvialant exam, well guess what, when I started to call other states to inquire about their exams, I found that their exams were different. I know that amazes you because as you have said "we all do the same tasks"! HOW COULD WE POSSIBLY HAVE DIFFERENT EXAMS? WHY WOULD THE CONTENT BE DIFFERENT? I started asking questions of opticians that I knew were leaders in the industry and they laughed! So I started to question, why would Opticians who serve on State Boards that are charged with protecting the public not want to have the same exam. Every Board administrator that I called said wow if you can convince opticians to work togther you would be a miracle worker! I said how tough can that be? All State Boards want the same thing, QUALIFIED OPTICIANS dispensing and being productive tax paying citizens of our states. But is that what we really want? Aren't most Boards made up of independants that want to controll competition and the pay scale of it's licensed opticians. I have heard people from Fla. say we do not want all those retiree's moving down here and opening up dispenseries in their garages. If we just issued them Licenses based on having a License from another state oh my god what would we have then. MY POINT IS AND WILL BE, that if we did a job and task analysis in every state there would NOT BE MUCH OF A DEBATE AS TO WHAT TASKS SHOULD BE TESTED ON THE PRACTICAL EXAM! N.C.S.O.R.B. members not just ME could then sit down in a room for a very short time and decide on an EXAM based on FACT not FICTION.

The pass rate is important in evaluating an exam. If you have a question on an exam and most people get it wrong you would naturally look at the question to make sure it is accurate. You wouldn't just ignore it!

We examine about 120 canididates in June and another 30 to 40 in December. We tract the results of both college and apprenticeship educated canididates. I will try to post the results tomorrow, if I can locate them. We find on the practical exam apprentices normally do well, and they should, its a practical exam and they have worked in the field everyday for 3 years. After all we are testing them on the tasks necessary to be a dispensing optician.

Harry I will say I look foward to your HELP in making this a reality in our life time. I just hope it is not to late...... Just a question, how many eyeglasses are being mailed into your state form unregulated internet sales?

Jon Bright

[wmcdonald]

Cindy,
Your question to me had to do with the definition of apprenticeship. In many states it is just OJT with no formal learning taking place other than what the "trainer" provides. That is limiting in itself. You are fortunate to live in a state with people like Prof. DeGennaro and many others who place education at a premium and have in place an educational component included in your training. According to the US Dept. of Labor and apprenticeship should include some formal classroom instruction, so most states programs do not qualify as a true apprenticeship. Unfortunately that is how it has been done in the majority of states, including my own state of NC and Virginia until just 10 or so years ago (it may be a bit longer or a bit less, I don't remember dates very well). The educational component is crucial to advancement, and it must be done quickly. Many years ago, people who worked for chains and doctors offices were considered the "enemy" by the majority of Opticians who were independent. Then the world changed and chains began to proliferate. MD dispensing, once considered unethical by the AAO and medical societies, became common place. There was no common ground for training, and with the diverse areas of practice for Opticians today, that common ground should be accomplished via formal education. It is our only common ground!Unfortunately, at every turn, chains and the OD lobby (not the average OD, but the leadership) fights any step we take. I have testified at numerous hearings where the National Association of Optometrists and Opticians fought licensure and educational efforts. They represent several major chains, and their goal is to minimize labor costs. I fully understand their predicament. They pay large amounts of money for someone who does little more than take a PD and measure a seg height in their mind. Why shold that require training at all? They don't recognize the problem solving skills and optical knowledge Opticians bring to the table. Independents are just as bad in many cases. They have little or no training either, but it must be better if done in their office. Thoses chains "couldn't do it right". I simply don't care where you work. We arer all OPTICIANS. I think that whatever we do to make the world a better place, whether it be a practical exam or another 2 or 3 certifications that mean little to anyone other than us is a positive, but I still suggest that some form of formal education is a required asset we must acquire to advance. You have done that as I describe it. I encourage all states to get on the road to success with education and I will gladly assist any and all who need assistance in the design and implementation of an educational program in whatever form they see fit.

[Joann Raytar]

Mr. Mcdonald,

You are correct. To survive most shops, independent and chain, have gotten their payrolls down to a minimum. This means that there are less people working there in general, never mind Optician to Apprentice ratios. If anyone can find the time to really train an Apprentice well then they are one of a very few.

I wonder if financing is one of our own roadblocks to formal education gaining speed. If it is, there is financial aid out there. Individuals just need to take the initiative to hunt it down.

Mr. Bright,
The online sale of prescription glasses and contacts is a tough one to question. What could be done? Make it law to treat online spectacle sales like corporate safety eyeglass sales? The person must be fit by an optician send in their form to somewhere like they do AO and then pick the glasses up at a dispensary. That would destroy the online businesses by defeating their usefulness and adding time to the consumers shopping experience. Having these requirements would be a good thing in my mind. As far a registered compaies go, I don't see why they aren't in place. They should not be allowed to ship directly to the consumer in licensed states at least. The companies, however, would fight it tooth and nail in the courts.

[Cindy Hamlin]

Harry,
Yes if I could do that the world would be a lovely and beautiful place. I, too, know of the hoops various states make opticians go through (since I cover 6 licensed states) in order to transfer licenses. I believe the national practical would certainly make a difference in that area.


Mr. McDonald,
Now knowing your definition of apprenticeship, I can now live with the 61% failure rate in NC. If apprenticeship does not include some type of educational requirement than we are doomed to fail!

[hcjilson]

Cindy,
When MA adopted the practical it had to be on a specific date in order to satisy those who had fullfilled their requirements for licensure but had not yet been licensed.The board chose Feb 28th as the cutoff date.Anyone fullfilling requirements prior to that date did not have to take the practical.Anyone after that date had to take it.There were only 2 applicants who fit that category between Mar 1 and mid April which was the cut off date for practical exam applications.The next exam was held the following (last) November.

Jo, I was informed at the last board meeting that the Optical course at Quinsigimond College was closing down due to a lack of students.I was also informed that the other optical course at Holyoke
Community now only has a one year certificate program.I have not seen any of this in print yet but apparently its pretty bleak.

Jon, I choose NOT to take exception to your statement

These tasks were part of the exam because of
well meaning people like you! They didn't have facts they just said they thought opticians should know how to do
them.

because I don't think you meant that personally and it would detract from this discussion, however if I have made a mistatement of fact in this thread, please feel free to email me with it.

Dr McDonald is right on the money as usual (doesn't he get sick of being right ALL the time? :D )but I would like his insight into the following. In light of the declining student enrollment within the optical programs nationwide, what scenario would make it possible to upgrade the educational requirements on a state level? I have been told, at least in Massachusetts, that it would reguire a change in the General Laws, and that is next to impossible.I have been somewhat occupied with this thread, to the exclusion of the "formal education" thread so I'm pretty much in the dark.What do you think?

I will respond to Jon's points later as time allows.
Best from harry j

[Joann Raytar]

hcjilson said:
A solution to this problem exists right now....in an allied health profession with a whole lot more life threatening situations than we as an industry will ever see.Are you interested in learning about it?
More importantly, is Jon interested in learning about it? (he IS the person that can do something about it...)
If anyone is interested I have a website at the office I think can give us the blueprint by which we just might be able to accomplish the goal of being accepted across state lines.If that happens there won't be any need for a National practical.

Just let me know......hj(i'm gone for the night but will pick up tomorrow)

Harry,

Were you going to tell us what it is or keep us in suspense? Right now, what you propose sounds like you might as well be saying that you have found a way to part the Red Sea. Time to share with the rest of the class. ;)

PS - I'm only on cup number one so this had better be good. :p

[Judy Canty]

Cindy,
I'm kind of curious...what 3 year technical college program did you attend here in VA?
Becky and Nancy taught Opticianry related instruction for the apprenticeship program through Fairfax County Adult Education. The related instruction courses are now offered as college level classes at NOVA Community College which began its certificate program in 1998. We will be expanding our program to an AAS in Technical Studies begining with the fall semester this year.

[Cindy Hamlin]

Judy Canty said:
Cindy,
I'm kind of curious...what 3 year technical college program did you attend here in VA?
Becky and Nancy taught Opticianry related instruction for the apprenticeship program through Fairfax County Adult Education. The related instruction courses are now offered as college level classes at NOVA Community College which began its certificate program in 1998. We will be expanding our program to an AAS in Technical Studies begining with the fall semester this year.

Judy,
I attended the program through Fairfax County Adult Education at the J. Cullen Bryant Adult Learning Center (I called it technical college since the other classes near us were the heating and air conditioning guys and another trade class).

I actually took the first year of schooling from Becky Coast, and was able to test out of the second year taught by Ron Benjamin and was taught by Nancy Benjamin in the third year. This all occurred about 1994. I sat for the boards in 1996! :D

[Cindy Hamlin]

hcjilson said:
Cindy,
When MA adopted the practical it had to be on a specific date in order to satisy those who had fullfilled their requirements for licensure but had not yet been licensed.The board chose Feb 28th as the cutoff date.Anyone fullfilling requirements prior to that date did not have to take the practical.Anyone after that date had to take it.There were only 2 applicants who fit that category between Mar 1 and mid April which was the cut off date for practical exam applications.The next exam was held the following (last) November.

That makes it better, Harry!


[/QUOTE]Dr McDonald is right on the money as usual (doesn't he get sick of being right ALL the time? :D )but I would like his insight into the following. In light of the declining student enrollment within the optical programs nationwide, what scenario would make it possible to upgrade the educational requirements on a state level? I have been told, at least in Massachusetts, that it would reguire a change in the General Laws, and that is next to impossible.I have been somewhat occupied with this thread, to the exclusion of the "formal education" thread so I'm pretty much in the dark.What do you think?
Best from harry j [/QUOTE]

Harry,
I recently had the priviledge to speak (on different occassions) with Ed DeGennaro and Randy Smith (J. Sargeant Reynolds) and Ellen Stoner (Durham Technical Community College) which offer the opticianry degree program via the internet. Both require hands-on training as well and the remainder of the AS degree requirements through your local college. They both told me they are experiencing an increase in enrollment due to the distance learning via the internet. Ellen even told me the programs offering the degree program via the internet (and I believe Laurie Pierce's school was also mentioned) have all had an increase in enrollment.

As I know from first-hand knowledge the commute to the schools can be an ardous one and I think this avenue will open up a whole new crop of students.

[hcjilson]

Jo, I just wanted to see if anyone was actually paying attention!

I am sending any interested parties to the National Council of Registration Board in Nursing.They have developed a model which we would do well to investigate.It would certainly address many of the problems highlighted by Jon Bright.

When you get to the page read the overview then click on the "RN/LPN/VN compact" at the bottom of the paragraph.This will give some background info.
Then click on FAQs on the bacground page and many of your questions will be answered.

http://www.ncsbn.org/public/nurselic...pact_index.htm

It will be important for those who go there to try to put what you see in the context of the optical regulation area.I would ask Judy to keep an eye out in terms of splitting this thread if discussion of an optical licensure compact takes off on its own.The older I get the more I have difficulty doing more than one thing at a time-
:D

It should also be mentioned that I am interested in how this could be accomplished rather than why it can't.
Best from Harry j
PS I'm giving the link to the faq's if you want to cut to the chase.
http://www.ncsbn.org/public/nurselic...nition_faq.htm

[wmcdonald]

Hi Harry,
I appreciate the flattery, but I assure you I am most often wrong, but I work hard! Regarding your question, I think we can all institute education if we choose to do so. The first step is to place emphasis on it from the employer side of the house. Some employers in my state don't care if you have a degree or not, only that you have a license and aren't dead (and some don't even mind the latter if they could get by without notifying the board). Others place a higher value on education. To make education work, it must mean something to the field. It would be better if required, but that may be difficult to accomplish. If we could get one large chain (say a Walmart or Lenscrafters) to recognize education, we would be well on our way.
I have been in discussions with several states who seek to add an educational component, and don't find it politically or financially feasible, and attempt to institute it through the rule making process every board has at its disposal. It has worked in several, including NC. In non-licensed states the door is wide open. I will be pleased to discuss with any state how to participate independently, but the NFOS has a great on line program ready and waiting (www.nfos.org) or the NAO has a correspondence based program that utilizes already existing courses and issues credit for the ABO/NCLE. As mentioned earlier, schools who institute DL programs are thriving, and I can name several who have had increases.
The key is emphasis. It will never mean anything until those already out there recognize the need for expanding our educational horizons. It can and should be done.

[Joann Raytar]

Harry,

My first question is do nursing laws and requirements vary from state to state.

[hcjilson]

Jo, While nursing is not my profession...(they make me nervous....I married one!) I would guess that almost certainly they differ from state to state.Certainly each state has its own exam.It is interesting to note that LPN's and Visiting Nurses also fall under the umbrella.

In any event, what do you think of the concept as applied to Opticianry.If it could be done correctly I think 2 goals could be accomplished.

This compact could act as the vehicle by which formal education is established as a requirement.

Secondly it would eliminate all the BS surrounding the current drive for a universal exam and practical.That prerogative remains with the licensing state.

The nursing compact was borne out of a shortage of Nurses geographicly.There needed to be some way to fill in gaps.If we think we have problems, Nursing has it worse.(subject of another thread in another forum on another bulliten board).At any rate this seems to have solved a problem for them.

I hope those who have been following this thread take the time to visit the above site.I'd love to hear some feedback.
best to all hj

[wmcdonald]

Unfortunately Harry, this was already tried almost 20 years ago. I was serving as president of the NC Opticians Association. I attended a state leadership meeting in the DC area (the state of confusion) and the topic was reciprocity. I went back, instituted in the law (we were already in Sunset review) a section that allowed anyone from another state to practice in NC by simply applying with some minor stipulations. I felt it fair that if someone had been an Optician for along time, we should not make them jump through a bunch of hoops to get a NC license. A large number of other states were to do the same, but it never happened. I was left hanging and took some heat in my home state for making it "too easy" for someone from out of state to come in. That has now been changed and requires the applicant to pass the board. I made a mistake because most other states don't have the requirements of NC. I want to have fair an equitable treatment for all Opticians, and I want them to be able to change states without excessive bureaurocratic red tape, but I also want them to have the same background as every other Optician sitting for the board is required to have. That presents a problem that only a consistant educational component from state to state will take care of. The Commission on Opticianry Accreditation has been evaluating programs for many years to make certain that these schools that offer Opticianry programs cover the necessary material and have similar equipment, etc. We will NEVER get each state to agree to reciprocate, but if we require education, it will be a moot point. Then each state can require what it sees fit and we will still have some assurances through education that each person is at least competent. It pointsto the need for formal educational standards. Rhode Island made it happen, and so can the rest of us. That is how the ODs handle their national boards and it will work for us too.

[Cindy Hamlin]

How can it possibly happen. I like Harry's idea. I don't see how you can get all the licensed states to agree on educational requirements when each state has thier own "issues".

How can we possible bridge this continental divide when states aren't willing to give?