Attention Opticians: Please stop blaming organizations for our failings.

[Judy Canty]

Perhaps it's time for a representative from both NFOS and COA to jump in and provide some explanations to those OB'ers who have not been exposed to distance ed and the requirements for accreditation.
Having been a commissioner on the COA, I am well aware of the requirements for accreditation for both on-campus and distance ed programs. They are significant. Those who continue to believe that graduates have no or limited dispensing experience have probably never walked into the well-run clinics that COA schools are required to operate or understand the concept of externships that are a requirement for graduation.
As with any arguement, it is best to come prepared.

[Optician1960]

CC,
Great point: Here is the link to the COA Essentials for those who have interest: http://www.coaccreditation.com/essen...dispensing.pdf

Joe D.

[Laurie]

About Distance Education:

(Thanks CC for prompting me to jump in, I should have jumped in sooner)... We are gearing up for final exams, and I am on the Internet with my students more than ever. So, I occasionally pop-in here, but haven't written much. And, my increasing Presbyopia is giving me a headache! ; )

We (Hillsborough Community College in Tampa FL) have been offering our Opticianry AS degree via distance learning since 2000, graduated our first class in 2002. We (NFOS) decided to develop our materials for online delivery at a meeting in 1998. We worked our optical tails off developing materials for two years prior to enrolling our first students.

Yes, we do use blackboard and other learning management systems. We created videos in a studio-classroom for each and every lesson. And, we did not simply video-tape our live lectures, but created each and every lesson for each course looking directly into the camera, so the student feels engaged...it appears that we are looking right at them.

When students in our live lectures asked great questions, I would create an additional video just for the online students with the questions, and the answers. (I actually pretended there was a live question, would pause, and say, 'that is a good question, let me repeat it)'...so that the online students would benefit from that as well.

ALL of our students, whether campus-based or online, take their quizzes online. Then, the midterms are mailed to the sponsor/proctor, and mailed back to us, un-touched by the student.

We have amazing technology that allows us to make videos of live lensometry (actually seeing in the reticle with movement), frame fitting/adjusting with real people, as well as edging, biomicroscopy, refracting and more. Our equipment allows us to have interactive smart-boards, and a digital overhead projection system that is like a virtual chalk-board. My college has sent in a camera crew to my labs on many occasions to shoot videos of hands-on competencies, focusing in on measurements, adjustments, and more.

All students who do not take their labs on campus must have a sponsor/optician help them practice all of the hands on competencies. The sponsor signs off on each and every competency. Additionally, no matter where the student lives, they must travel to our campus for written and hands-on testing each and every semester, which is 6 semesters (Fall, Spring, and a short Summer semester).

Our Opticianry degree is 72 credit hours, 60 of them are OPT and the remaining 12 are general edu courses. One of their OPT courses is 'Directed Research', where they must develop an entire business plan and show a portfolio for their 'business', including inventory, costs, bank loan, decor, an actual location, rent, and how many pair they must sell per day/week to survive. This gives them an appreciation for the bottom line as well. They must present their business with a white-board and back-up data on final exam day.

We have an articulation agreement with the University of South Florida, where our students can enter as Juniors, take business courses, and matriculate through for a BS in Business Management.

We primarily serve Florida residents, however, we have graduated students from South/Latin America, California, Texas, Ohio, Michigan...even Japan! Each student had to travel to our campus each semester for final written exams and hands-on practicals. I cannot tell you how many times a student has told me that they have been in the field for years already, and did not know what they did not know!

I wish we could have this conversation face-to-face, as it is hard to project my passion for formal education through typed words, without being accused of acting high-and-mighty. For the people here who know me, they can attest that I am one of the most down-to-earth people you will ever meet (I was raised in Maine for goodness sake!!!) (yes, we had plumbing...indoors!)

It would be great for opticians here to take just one course at any of the NFOS schools...I think you would be surprised. Optical education is not the 'old-school' that people think...we have evolved. Yes, we can always improve, but the base of an AS in Opticianry is a great start, and can be done!

Sorry if this was too long of a response, I could actually go on and on...

Bottom line... People who go through a curriculum as I described will have the base to be the best future opticians. Their redo-rates will be lower, as they will be well-versed in optical science and technology, and will have had many people check their work prior to graduating. Can we guarantee a super-star? No. The additional qualities of salesmanship, fashion savvy, communication skills, and all of the other qualities to be a super-star in ANY FIELD have alot to do with the person.

I cannot imagine anyone being against formal education for our FUTURE opticians...it blows my mind.

Big Hugs and Smooches,

: )

Laurie

[Wes]

FYI ALL:
The Summit is one week away. Does anyone have anything to add?

[tmorse]

Well, since you asked…
Wes, the condensed private opticianry school option needs top be put on the table with respect to the 28 unlicensed States, regardless of those whose jobs hinge on the 2-year AAS model.
It used to be that if you can find a way to do virtually anything either better or quicker, it would be acknowledged and the world would beat a path to your door.
But, maybe not opticianry.
IMHO, unlicensed States will never adopt any 2-year program, but maybe a 6-9-month intensive program can be a viable alternative.
to having no regulation at all. The public deserves to be served by qualified personnel, and any formal training, followed by a rigorous Advanced exam will benefit both the public interest and the optical industry.

[Quantrill]

Here is some input from a young-ish person who has taken and passed the ABO -

My only complaint with the ABO was that it is too archaic. Instead of multiple questions about glass lenses, how about some free-form questions? I assume this will happen in time.

I also realize that there is so much that I don't know that used to be common knowledge. The troubling thing is that I am more knowledgeable than the vast majority of so-called "opticians" I encounter (I am also from the same area as Darryl, apparently. The level of education around here is absolutely atrocious).

Mandatory licensing is a very good idea, but I seriously doubt this would ever happen. The chains are too big now and would never allow this. As others have mentioned, the trend is towards de-regulation as opposed to more regulation. And even if a few states mandate licensing, I'm sure the chains would just work around the laws and have the "optician" dispense and inspect eyewear while everyone else rings up sales and cuts jobs.

Online opticals are a joke but of course people are making money off it. Your independent shop may refuse to adjust outside frames but then the 'net buyers would just go to the chains for free adjustments.

The underlying issue here is that companies can still turn a profit without having knowledgeable opticians. Hire a good salesperson to style people into frames that look nice and then contract the work to an outside lab. Or employ lab techs who only know how to push buttons. If a customer complains, just convince them to go into a different lens or frame style. Eventually they will be satisfied or may take their business elsewhere. The slight loss in business to upset customers is more than offset by the low wages you pay.

It's unfortunate, but the above pattern seems to be happening everywhere (chains and independents).

I'm not saying that opticians are not needed, but with digital equipment, lenses, and even measurements, the skills of a good optician are not required as much as they once were. Of course, with free-form and the adaption issues posed in a previous thread, good opticians will always be needed to some degree. But one person to troubleshoot per office is probably all that is needed. That is what makes me sad. I've worked hard and learned a lot over the past decade, but it just doesn't seem right to have so many uneducated colleagues in our midst. When a customer walks into an optical shop, she should know beyond a shadow of a doubt that she will be encountering good, knowledgeable opticians.

So we have the problem, what are the steps necessary for a solution?

I guess we could start at Darryl's #1. Unify opticianry organizations, in particular the ABO and NAO, and then strengthen this organization. Actively promote membership. Charge members enough to allow the organization to work towards our common goals, while showing members the results of that work.

Whoever is in charge of the ABO and NAO will you please unify and promote membership so that we can actively promote our profession?

[Wes]

Quantrill, I appreciate your commentary, and I will attempt to effect positive change in the industry.

[Darryl Meister]

Ah, I made a typo. I meant unify the OAA and NAO.

Best regards,
Darryl

[sharpstick777]

FYI ALL:
The Summit is one week away. Does anyone have anything to add?

To build on tx11's post on having a multiple level test, I commented that there were more advantages than was listed, so here is the key advantage to that approach.

Wes, you stated that the ABO test must be a sampled based on a potential testing candidates. So if we layered the ABO testing, it would essentially change the candidate pool, allowing the test to be more reflective of the actual needs of opticianry and not candidates themselves. For example, the first test could be "Frame Stylist", the second "Apprentice Optician", and the third "Optician", the fourth "Advanced Optician" (the tests could all be adminstered at the same time, at the same location). So for the first test "Frame Stylist" the candidate sample pool would be essentially what we had now. But the Apprentice test sample would be taken from people who passed the first test, and the Optician test would require they pass the first two. T

This way the sample has effectively improved, they have been tested twice and so have some optical knowledge. This way the test could be geared more towards future needs of real Opticians.

[sharpstick777]

.... we are still losingopticianry schools due to lack of interest, not creating them. And very fewexisting schools have so many students enrolled that they must turn many otherpotential students away.
... Darryl

I agree with you Darryl that an increase in demand has to accompany supply ,but that is why this discussion is in this forum: its “testing” that creates that demand. If youlook at where the thriving educational programs are they are ALL in states thathave high testing requirements. That is why if we want to advance education inanyway it has to come from improving the ABO exam (or a replacement), as its the de factolicensure in 27(?) states.

In Washington state the Optical programs are growing (I instruct at one), andalthough we are a licensed state, licensure is NOT fully required to practice, it’sonly offered. Any OD or MD can hire asmany unlicensed people as they want, and they can do all the work of opticians,anywhere in the practice with no requirements what-so-ever. And they can make decentmoney. They can't legally however open their own practice or callthemselves “Dispensing Opticians” without a license. (LDO's in WA can actuallyfit and RX contacts based on a recent spectacle RX too).
So why do people study, and take the LDO exam? Thetesting in WA is fairly rigorous and people take the test not necessarily forfinancial reasons but for professional stature. As a response, theschools here are growing.
Washington is proof that this doesn’t have to be legislated;there is effectively no enforcement in Washington, and 95% of Opticians can continue in thier current position if licesure ended tomarrow. If we raise the testing requirements, peoplewill seek education to meet those requirements.

[Chris Ryser]

The apprenticeship system was well suited for the Middle Ages........................

Apprenticeship was a common method of passing on trade skills before formal education and training programs became widely available. You would spend years learning and mastering a trade from a master craftsman, until you finally took over for him or started your own shop. It does not refer to a guy who learns to use the cash register at McDonald's during his first week of "training." Nor does it refer to learning to take a PD measurement from someone who got hired 6 months before you did.

The apprenticeship system was well suited for the Middle Ages. Today, however, "apprenticeship" simply means "no experience or training necessary." And you will never increase your professional status in that kind of context. Yet the term "apprenticeship" has been thrown around in these discussions for at least 20 years or more in an attempt to romanticize what we are doing. But, since the status of professional opticianry has failed to advance in over 20 years, are we really fooling anyone but ourselves?

Nice speech Darryll........................However in those days of what you call Middle Ages, which still applies today to the central Europeen countries an optician that has gone through the apprentiship, is a heck more qualified to be called that name than what you describe in your post.

If you have not learned the basics you will never understand the more advanced stages. In Europe you have to get the papers stating that you do master and understand, and can work in this profession. A apprentiship in Europe is most of the time a 4 year practical learning stage with 2 days of optical trade school a week at 8 hours per day. That totals to 400 hours per year, excluding 2 weeks of holidays. Over the 4 years we would have 1,600 hours of schooling, if that is not enough for a basic opticians profession please let me know. To end the apprentiship they have to pass the final exam that is a three day expirience. If successfully passed the papres are accepted just about all over Europe.

An optician at that stage can work, but not manage and run a business, he needs further education and has to have the necessary diplomas to prove his status.

I really believe that the antiquitated "Middle Age system" across the Atlantic is still more advanced than what you got this side of the Atlantic.

[sharpstick777]

Look to the NFOS site and, if memory serves, there are close to 40 programs. The COA accredits only 25 or so. The link for the NFOS is www.nfos.org. I did look at it, and I see one additional program, Sharpstick, yours, that is not even a member. You really ought to do that.......it is not an expensive organization to join and faculty can share much.

Warren, I went through both lists before posting. A few of those 40 programs are in Canada, & TOPS is not open the public (military only). 2 in California don't offer any more than a 10 month program . Two didn't have working websites (or any mention on thier school website), so if they don't have a website in this day and age I could not consider that program active. In those cases I searched both Google or the school website for mentions of the program, to no avail.

After eliminations, that left only 25 verifiable programs standing that offer a 2 year program (and I counted mine) with any web presence. I am sure we could find one or two more, but then we really have a marketing issue on our hands as well.

[Barry Santini]

All well and good, my friends, except for one important thing:

Most of the hands-on "skills" that really differentiate the in-person, B&M experience from online are ONLY learned through a proper apprenticeship, wherein the master knows what's what, and the apprentice knows he's got alot to learn.

Barry

Pop Quiz: My opening line is a direct quote from what seminal Sci-Fi movie of the Mid-1950's?

[Judy Canty]

All well and good, my friends, except for one important thing:

Most of the hands-on "skills" that really differentiate the in-person, B&M experience from online are ONLY learned through a proper apprenticeship, wherein the master knows what's what, and the apprentice knows he's got alot to learn.

Barry

Pop Quiz: My opening line is a direct quote from what seminal Sci-Fi movie of the Mid-1950's?

...and the circular route begins again. Sigh.

[wmcdonald]

Warren, I went through both lists before posting. A few of those 40 programs are in Canada, & TOPS is not open the public (military only). 2 in California don't offer any more than a 10 month program . Two didn't have working websites (or any mention on thier school website), so if they don't have a website in this day and age I could not consider that program active. In those cases I searched both Google or the school website for mentions of the program, to no avail.

After eliminations, that left only 25 verifiable programs standing that offer a 2 year program (and I counted mine) with any web presence. I am sure we could find one or two more, but then we really have a marketing issue on our hands as well.

I think I mentioned above 25 accredited programs on the site, but it may be 24. My point is there are several places folks can go. But the indistry must support education before these programs are truly meeting their potential. Kepp working on yours, Van. We need it.