I am writing something along these lines right now... there are more advantages to what you propose than you have listed here. My hope is for a multi-level approach where each segment has a test. By making steps from Frame Stylist, to Apprentice Optician to Optician, to Advanced Optian and then Master Optician clearly defined and modular it gives a clearer path follow, makes testing and learning more efficient and will improve licensing recipriocity across states.
Although the ABO does offer Advanced and Masters the path there is not very clear, so less than 5% of ABOC's take it.
I think the path is more unknown, than unclear. A quick visit to the ABO-NCLE website makes it clear. What I mean is, many opticians don't know what an advanced or master optician is. They've never heard of or seen one. It might as well be a dragon. At the ABO-NCLE conference last September, I was stopped by a headhunter from Luxottica and asked what an ABO Master was (that's the nametag they gave me). My very next two conversations were with Curt Duff and Chris Allen to discuss the utter lack of marketing for the Master Certification.
Wesley S. Scott, MBA, MIS, ABOM, NCLE-AC, LDO - SC & GA
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.” -Albert Einstein
Of course it's okay for you to give a back handed insult. You're clearly the best at that.
I have plenty of confidence in my abilities. I just wouldn't presume to suggest I'm smarter than the best here, say Darryl Meister or Harry Chilinguerian for example. It's easy to say you're the best when no one knows who you are.
This thread gets better and better. Too funny.
Wesley S. Scott, MBA, MIS, ABOM, NCLE-AC, LDO - SC & GA
“As our circle of knowledge expands, so does the circumference of darkness surrounding it.” -Albert Einstein
My gosh with all the peacocking going on, how does one get anything done?
Confidence has nothing to do with it. I have read this thread three or four times and with all the lively discussion and ruffled feathers... it is the air of who is the best and who is this or that which prevails. It's very interesting.... If you are in this field, I would expect you know optics and be confident, after that it is the actions you take, the way you treat people and the way you make them feel that is the difference. We can sometimes forget that our field is about people. There is nothing better than the reaction of having someone put their glasses on and well you all know that feeling....that is why we do what we do.
By and large the general public has not a clue what we do, what kind of education or certification/licensure it takes... let alone that they can make a career out of this. They do know how to become a CNA, Massage Therapist, Physical Therapist, RN, and so on.
What can be accomplished in the next two years for current opticians? IF there was a conerted financial effort could a national liscensing campaign succeed? Like Barry said elsewhere, ther ewill never be apublic outcry for it. It is up to us to change the landscape. And quickly. Education is great.. I'm all for it. but a qualifying certification to perform dispensing must be established FIRST(made law).THEN the education and training requirements to get that certification need to be established and made readily available. Without the NECESSITY to attain the certfication - Dollars will not be spent on education and training. Really
Thanks for allowing me to give my humble opinions. I appreciate the feed back from my peers.
The Constitution of the United States places the issue of licensing squarely in the hands of the states, so while you make a good point, it is not something we can accomplish. The Society to Advance Opticianry is a group of like minded individuals who seek a somewhat similar path. If you want to join forces with others, look at their goals. Laurie, Wes, Johns, gmc. Don and others will be here to answer your questions.
One thing you should be aware of, however, regarding this new group; you must have the minimum educational requirements to be accepted into full membership. These requirements have been widely published here, so I will not go into them. If you like the goals of the organization, you can become a candidate for membership, and be accepted as a full member upon completion of the prescribed requirements. I mention these things, becase some here loved the idea, and loudly tout their professional status, but did not have the credentials to really prove it. The were upset when they could not gain membership, and unwilling to pay the professional dues, so now sit on the fringe and complain. Take a look at this group.......you may like the approach we are taking.
What you are saying makes sense, but it has been discussed here thousands of times. We will not gain licensure in every state until all Opticians have similar backgrounds, and as this thread proves, that is a lofty goal. I appreciate your sentiment in this national approach, but licensure is not the approach for the reasons stated above.........and I can assure you, the Congress will not support a change in the Constitution to help us. In reality, we are our own worst enemy. We must agree on a common definition and have specific education and training requirements before we are going anywhere.
It has been my experience that people who are looked up to as being confident and as being among the best at what they do typically do not go around bragging, boasting etc. They just go about their business and get the job done. Scratch beneath the surface of those who boast and you will often find insecurities or other issues trying to be masked by a facade.
Relating this discussion back to the topic of this thread, I don't think a discussion about "confidence" has much of a place in a thoughtful discussion about an upcoming conference on the direction opticians are moving.
This again...
Properly medicated for your protection.
As Warren mentions, the licensing falls on the States to put in place and enforce. This was and is among the biggest challenges for optician licensing, IMHO. If you take a look at the states that have licensing today, you will be amazed at the differences in the requirements to become and stay licensed: education and/or apprenticeship rules, who can preceptor the AO (including those in school), board exams (objective vs subjective), CE... Some of these tests and rules are very practical, some may be deemed too easy, and some are not focused on protecting the consumer but on reducing competition (I will not get into specifics, do the research). It is the last category that has and will continue to make some people nervous about seeing additional licensing.
The only way that licensing across the board will have a chance is if the leaders stay focused on protecting the consumer and not on protecting the profession or limiting capitalism.
Of course the other white elephant in the room is the ODs and MDs who do not need to follow these rules that are in place in the licensed states. They have terrific amounts of cash and influence, so changing their dispensing rules is not likely.
Thanks wmcdonald, IMHO many opticians across the U.S. DO have an already established common background The ABOC. There are probably opticians in every state that have obtained some sort ABO certification ,dating all the way back to the early 70's. Is this not enough? I think I read on another thread where candidates were waiting to hear about their ABO results that last years pass rate was 53%. It seems to me that if people are failing it ( even if it not at the level of expertise that some would like) it is still filter out those who are not putting forth the minimum effort to aquire the minimum knowledge AND it is already in place... nothing to devolpe.
Perhaps we should change the renewing CE's requirement to include a mandatory 3 CE's of more technical info, 3 CE's of refractive conditions, 3 CE's about business and ethics etc. This would gradually expose the certified opticians to more technical aspects of optics and maybe over the next ten years the ABOC test could become more difficult to reflect this increase knowledge. The CE courses could be used as STUDY GUIDES for future opticians. MAYBE :)
The current test ABO does not meet todays needs. The test is all about craming knowledge but nothing like a practical test that demonstrate instruments use. Further more the low passing score is because we have a poor pool of applicant opticians. What you want is complacency in an industry that has changed. There are other players slowly entering the testing arena and that will and should bother the ABO, NCLE and OAA. The cash cow may come to an end if they do not come up with their practical test and I believe they may have that on the works. This summit may prove an announcement of that. Any one can confirm that?
CNG
If it were required, it may mean something, but as with most certifications, it is voluntary. It also takes little preparation to pass the NOCE and even then the pass rate it only around 50%. It is a national standard we are not meeting, and to meet it, we must improve education and training. Think about this, in many states Opticians can fit contact lenses. This is part and parcel of the history if Opticianry and should be maintained and even expanded. This is but one example of the difference in perceptions across borders. There are many others, but they have been discussed here many time.
True and if you continue to use this approach the results will continue to be the same.
Or you could do it my way .
Establish and advertise the brand first so the public knows and recognises the nationally advertised trademark.
License the use of the trademark to member opticians through a fee structure and education structure.
You can also license the employers use to advertise the trademark but of course that is dependant on their hiring licensed trademarked optician members.
The beauty is you do not need state approval. The other beauty is that by the time you get national membership in significant numbers then you will have the support of the state .
The other beauty is that by the time you get significant member numbers you won't need the State to legislate anything .
You will now be fully self regulating without the State or Province .
So quit yer bickering and be reasonable.
You guys have more different organizations than Carter has liver pills . Scrap them all . At the moment they are divisive in nature and not a coherent adhesive bunch. You don't need them . None have a clear cut approach to unification . Most of the public as well as the opticians have little to know idea who these groups are or what they do and that is because they have no marketing plan or brand awareness. If you stay with them and they continue the same plans then you continue to fail . Remove them from the equation and you remove all the bickering.
Start over and do it right this time . Start with the brand , trademark the brand, advertise the brand to the public, create the demand, license that to the opticians and to the employers. Use that money from licensing to advertise the brand more. Make education part of keeping the license to use the trademarked brand.
Now you finally have what you need, a recognised brand and cohesion. Now you slowly increase the education requirements but you already have unification.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks