Originally Posted by Wes
We've been asking all these questions for years now. YEARS!!!!! Has anything happened to move us in a positive direction? Not that I can see. Dr. McDonald has the right approach and maybe a few others like him but not enough. Not in a business that is not considered "medical" by our patients. The exam portion maybe but we have always been thought of as sales clerks with pliers and screwdrivers by the average patient. Chris.
Chris Beard
The State of Jefferson !
I'm a Medford man – Medford, Oregon. Up in Medford, we take our time making up our minds."
Some opticians blame the other Os and the industry powers for their lot. As long as you blame everyone for your problems, you'll always have problems. Some opticians wait for something to happen. Things don't happen. Things get DONE. By PEOPLE. And then some opticians want to criticize the people working to secure this profession. Sit on the sidelines. Take no responsibility for yourself. Blame others. Criticize any efforts made. And then you wonder why this conversation is still going on years later?
If Opticanry is dying or dead, can you make a good living in another field? Are all of your eggs in this basket, because if they are you better start doing something. Help yourself. Help us. Join us.
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
Funny...I seem to recall a certain politician use similar words...what was his name....a Mr. Palpatine I think it was...(que robotic breathing)
You forgot the other group of opticians that are working for change in their own ways and with other organizations of their choosing across the country. Just not yours.Enjoy your club!
I welcome all organizations....."all in all, it's just another brick in the wall"
Please, tell us about your efforts. Perhaps we'd like to join.Funny...I seem to recall a certain politician use similar words...what was his name....a Mr. Palpatine I think it was...(que robotic breathing)
You forgot the other group of opticians that are working for change in their own ways and with other organizations of their choosing across the country. Just not yours.
Those who need to know - already do. Thanks.
You forgot the other group of opticians that are working for change in their own ways and with other organizations of their choosing across the country. Just not yours.I can't forget something I never knew about, and you obviously have no intention of telling anyone about this group of opticians working for change. It may prove difficult to effect change as an unknown, but assuming that it's positive change for opticians and opticianry, I wish you and yours luck.Those who need to know - already do. Thanks.
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
"Crabs-in-a-bucket" Alert!Those who need to know - already do. Thanks.
Aw, :poop:. All the new opticianry movements been outed!!!"Crabs-in-a-bucket" Alert!
I understand what your saying and in the point " but no one is willing to pay me what I am worth " I totally agree. But if you don't keep up with education you fall by the way side and it's harder too come from behind then it does to stay in front. I have my 2 year degree, NY licensed, COA, and a few others. Now I'm not patting myself on the back I just wanted to stay in front of the learning curve and not get run over by it. What some on this discussion don't seem too see or refuse to see is that the competition mainly the Boxes and Empire are not going to stand by and let this happen. They already have in NY where they got the license watered down to a Mickey Mouse exam that isn't worth the paper it's written on. They did this because they thought not enough opticians were passing the exam because it was to hard. Now we have a mess. And the other part they are refusing to see is you need a national organization to accomplish this which is where I thought the Opticians Association of America was. You have the national organization now get behind it but they want to start a new organization with very little cohesiveness instead of getting behind the OAA. I'm done rant over?
AS I understand it in NY (where I'm currently a regional director on the NYS Society of Opticians board), there are two reasons:
1. The state board of examiners wants to leave in place an apprenticeship route to allow the less advantaged to obtain a "trade"
2. In the last few exams (ABO), I was told that the apprentices did *better* than the school graduates!
Go figure. So much for the state of the art in NYS opticianry education, if the information relayed to me is true (my source appears reliable)
B
Last edited by Barry Santini; 09-16-2011 at 06:06 PM.
Could be that the apprentices deal with real world situations and the educated deal with the theoretical.
Could also be that those training the apprentices know what they are doing and the educators are eggheads whose knowledge came from "research" and books.
Chip
College-based Opticianry programs are required to provide "real-world" clinic and externship experience. Why do you insist that the two are mutually exclusive. Perhaps you should actually look at the curriculum requirements at a COA accreditated program. Ignorance is NOT bliss, it's professionally damaging.
There isn't nor will there ever be national licensure for any profession. Doctors, nurses nor any other profession has national licensure. What they have is standards that are recognized by individual states and therefore greater reciprocity. That should certainly be a long term goal of opticianry.And the other part they are refusing to see is you need a national organization to accomplish this which is where I thought the Opticians Association of America was. You have the national organization now get behind it but they want to start a new organization with very little cohesiveness instead of getting behind the OAA. I'm done rant over?
The OAA is a national organization whose purpose is primarily to influence legislation. It has been many years since a state has become a newly licensed state for opticianry. There are many opinions as to why. The SAO intends to work with the OAA and other organizations to educate, then legislate. If this is to happen, it will take an effort of many and will take years to achieve.
That maybe now but when it was first changed the started reason was it's to hard! Really too hard! And your second point proves that the NY exam has been dumbed down into a Mickey Mouse Exam to help people get through. It's almost like our public education system why teach when you can give a pass or fail, don't want any too feel bad! Would like to give the exami took in 1973 to graduates now and see how many would pass. Yes it was hard and over 3 and half days of testing which was hard but we got through.
Here is something to ponder for some of you in Liscensure states, In Missouri, where I am, in St. Louis at least, there are NO college courses for Optician training, and this with the UM- St. Louis Optometry School here. I have looked into out of state certifications as well as Canadian and European but, most require either college/tech school training or something else ( like living in the state) so much as I would like to study to show myself approved, at this time, the ABO and NCLE are my only venues (having trouble with NCLE because of the nature of our equipment and the only one who can show me are the OD's in the practice) One of the men I apprenticed under got his training at the Empire State School of Optics in the 40's and another learned it in the Army, so short of OJT, there is nothing out there. I was fortunate and lucked into getting my training with some great people. but anyone want to make some suggestions?
Location of schools is important, but consider this, could you become an OD, Nurse, PA or anything else because a school was not located nearby? Of course not. Why should Opticianry be different. Is the material not demanding enough to warrant academic study? If not, then the discussion is ended, and it will not matter. Unfortunately, the pass rates an the ABO is about 50%, an indication that folks are not learning the very basic information required at entry level. The only way to improve is to require an education for those in the future. Opticians can improve and expand our opportunities, but it will not happen without education. Is it dead, not, but it is dying, and we need to stop the bleeding by coming up with a plan for improvement. Education is the only way for us to reach our potential.
There are lots of opportunities out there. Several NFOS programs offer distance learning. There is the NAIT program, an intense two year optics program from Canada offered via distance learning. Thanks to Wes, it is now approved as part of state licensure in South Carolina. Other states would probably approve it if it is submitted. Georgia approves the Career Progression Program offered by the NAO. It as accepted as part of state licensure in Georgia. I received Florida and Georgia (since lapsed) licenses by practicing in an unlicensed state for five years plus the NOCE and CLRE.
There are certainly other opportunities that I'm not aware of. That's a major goal of the SAO. We want to help those that desire to further their education identify and access those opportunities. PM me, Wes, Laurie or Dr. McDonald for further information.
Opticianry degrees online? At least, the next generation of dispensers will be better prepared than ever to work with internet eyeglass sales!
A quote just today from a Bachelor degree holder currently working on her Masters, in response to increasing pay rate trends for university presidents:
"Guess what university presidents?--the world of academia is NOT EVEN CLOSE to the real world! I would take someone with 5 yrs of real world experience in ANY field over someone with a PHD and no real world experience ANY DAY! We need to bring back apprenticeships in EVERY SINGLE FIELD! People are different, and we all learn in different ways. Our educational system now is a crock of crap that tries to paint a broad brush stroke for every person and it DOES NOT WORK!"
And another perspective:
"I've worked in the real world. I also almost completed a degree in criminal justice before getting a job in law enforcement--(I was not an officer, but served in an ancillary position). Sadly I made a choice and switched to a position that requires a traditional degree. I learned more in one week in the real world than I ever did in all of my criminal justice classes combined. I realize that one degree is not the same as others, but the underlying idea is the same--we are all different and learn in different ways. We should not force everyone to go down the same path if they want to become, say, an accountant, lawyer, doctor, computer engineer, etc. Sure, continue to allow traditional education for those that want to go that way. But we should also allow other paths to get to the same destination for any field--like apprenticeships. We are all different and should allow for those differences. Like I said earlier, just because someone doesn't want to sit and listen to some "smart" person with a PHD drone on and on about this theory or that theory, doesn't mean that person isn't smart--it may just be that they don't learn that way. I wouldn't say that's the exception. I would say most people don't want to sit for hours on end in classes. I think most people learn better and faster in hands on situations."
It's just as easy to make the argument in the other direction. Education is all well and good, but for dispensing opticianry until there is a viable national standard of competency (never going to happen if each state tries to tackle the problem individually ie: piece meal licensing) it becomes a fragmented ad hoc 'solution'. Which, in reality, is no different than where we are right now.
The way to get reciprocity across the board is the way every other profession did it. Create a set of standards that the current licensing states will accept from another licensing state and then get the non licensing states to adopt similar. A large percentage of opticians need to be raised to that level before that happens. Thus educate, legislate in that order. If enough opticians are outshining their contemporaries, and they have a viable brand, e.g. ABOM or Ophthalmic Optician, others will seek to identify with that. Raise enough people to that level and legislation becomes possible.
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
Regulation is the horse that drives the education cart.
How much education does it take to be an expert optician? In my opinion it takes a 2 year program and an ongoing ce requirement which is what most Canadian opticians have. Anything more than that and you are either overeducated or underemployed. Anything less and, well, you're not as good, but you still have a job and your boss enjoys lower wage expenses.
At its peak, opticianry in Canada was a great profession that paid well. Demand for opticians exceeded supply. (1975 to 1995)
Today, the industry is LESS regulated. Widespread delegation. Internet retail. Technically illegal dispensing that everyone knows about but no one does anything about. Technology plays a role in this as well. Billions of dollars worth of eyeglasses and contact lenses are sold without a prescription or a licensed dispenser.
Is more education going to stop any of this? Hardly.
Regulation is the only way. But regulation is controlled by politicians. And politicians are controlled by big business. The same big businesses that don't want restrictions on the way they conduct business, or who they can sell glasses to.
In the last decade especially, optician wages have been in the decline, even though opticians have kept up with their education levels. The education hasn't changed. The REGULATION changed.
I respectfully disagree, Wes. You are one of the smart ones we need. But regulate first, then educate.
Last edited by LandLord; 09-16-2011 at 10:05 PM.
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
I've argued this for a long time. An example I've used before; If you didn't have to pass a driving test and obtain a license to drive, would you? IMHO, opticianry will have to be forced into education.
Landlord:
I have to respectfully disagree. It is clear that a comprehensive ophthalmic dispenser curriculum should be 4 years. In a two year cirriculum, the best one can do is "expose" the students to areas and skills such as refraction, building and maintaining trust through eye and body, business skills, social medial navigation, and especially troubling shoting vision and fit complaints. Mastering adjustments alone would take 4 years, and thats with a course/lab every semester.
Most of the seasoned opticians Ive met seem to have 15-25 years of *3* years experience in these regards.
B
Ok Barry, I'll concede that you wouldn't know it all after 2 years, and you would be a better optician after 4 years. But you still wouldn't know it all after 4 years either. So then why not 6 years? ...and couldn't you apply that to all professions? Optometry is 4 years. Why not 6 or 8?
How do you arrive at 4 years?
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
The other side of the coin is, if tomorrow, opticians need a mandatory 4 year degree to be eligible for license, why would companies pay more? Why would governments enact new regulations?
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks