July 2011 Nurse Licensure Examination Result - July 2011 Nurse Board Exam Result

HOY DANTE ANG, HINDI KA TALAGA MAINDINTIDHAN.. NGYON NAMAN TEST 5 LANG GUSTO MO.. MAY SIRA KA TALAGA

KINAIN NA PALA NI G. DANTE ANG YUNG SALITA NIYA SA TV NA 2 OUT OF 5 SUBJECTS AY FULLY TAINTED NG LEAKAGE.

ALING SALITA NIYA ANG SUSUNOD NA KAKAININ NIYA--NA AGAINST REALITY, COMMON SENSE, AND PREPONDERANCE OF FACTS YUNG I-ASSUME NIYA NA 100% NG EXAMINEES AY NON-PASSERS (INSTEAD OF JUST THE 25,000 PRESENT NON-PASSERS) KAYA MALI ULI ANG SINABI NIYANG DAPAT AY I-RETAKE ANG TEST 5?

Mr. Ang's sudden change of his pronouncement and the leaving of just ONE subject but still with 10 valid questions greatly weaken not just HIS CREDIBILITY but also the case against RETAKE.

HINDI TAYO DAPAT MANIWALA SA TAONG PABAGO-BAGO NG ISIP DAHIL KAHIT KAILAN HINDI NATIN ALAM ANG FINAL STAND NIYA!!!


MARCELO L. TECSON
martecson@yahoo.com
August 27, 2006

CORRECTION TO THE QUICK FLASH OF THOUGHTS BUT NOT A SUDDEN CHANGE OF MIND, here's as corrected:

"...greatly weaken not just HIS CREDIBILITY but also the case FOR RETAKE."


MARCELO L. TECSON
August 27, 2006

MARCELO TECSON, YOU'RE THE MAN!!! GALING MO!!!

PUBLIC LIVES
Testing culture

By Randy David
Inquirer
Last updated 07:15am (Mla time) 08/27/2006
Published on page A11 of the August 27, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

PROFITING from test leaks is probably as old as testing itself. Advances in the technology of retrieval and duplication of information, coupled with the heightened competitiveness in almost all professions, may have made resort to it easier and more tempting. Even so, we may assume that the methods and principles for preventing it and managing its effects have also been refined over time. What is most amazing about the current nursing board exam fiasco is the thoughtless response that seems to characterize its handling.

On July 17, the Professional Regulation Commission-Board of Nursing (PRC-BON) issued a resolution that nullified the scores in 110 of the 500 test questions in the 2006 nursing board exams. This was its knee-jerk response to the finding that there has been a leak in those areas covered by these questions. Since most of the excluded items pertained to neuro-psychiatric nursing, the resolution assumed either that the areas were not that crucial, or that the level of competence in those areas may be deduced from an examinee’s performance in the other areas. It was the easy way out because it did not distinguish between those who profited from the leak and those who did not. It did not lift the stigma from the 2006 takers.

No less inconsiderate is the recommendation of the recently formed Presidential Task Force which seeks the invalidation of the results in the two disputed subjects of the 2006 nursing licensure examination, and the retake of the test in the two areas. Not even the offer that the government will foot the bill for the new round of exams can diminish the anguish of those who took and passed the examination by honest means. Many contingencies shape one’s performance in any exam. Anyone who has ever taken a difficult test knows that psychological preparedness on test day itself and luck can spell the difference between passing and failing. That is why I fully sympathize with those who are aggrieved by the blanket nullification of exam results in the areas tainted by the leaks.

Dante Ang, who heads the Malacañang task force as well as the Commission on Filipinos Overseas, rightly worries that the scandal may affect the credibility of Philippine nurses and, perhaps, their marketability abroad. But the solution to this problem cannot just possibly lie in the indiscriminate cancellation of disputed results. It has to begin with measured steps that seek to protect the interests of the legitimate passers while preserving the overall integrity of the exams. What might these be?

First, try to isolate those examinees who most likely made it entirely on their own from those who most probably passed because they were aided by the leak. We may reasonably assume that those whose grades in the tainted subjects do not greatly deviate from their scores in the other subjects very likely passed on their own. I am not an expert, but I am aware that there are simple statistical methods for determining this. A computer program can go through the scores of all the examinees and quickly identify those who register suspicious spikes in their scores in those two contaminated subjects. The names of these examinees can then be compared with the names of those in the list of the review centers where the leaked questions were supposed to have been disseminated. When there is a match, a retake should be strongly considered. The resulting list can be further refined and trimmed down by determining who among the examinees in this list registered the greatest similarity of right and wrong answers in the two disputed subjects. It is they who must be required to retake the whole examination. In this manner, we do not stigmatize and penalize everybody for the sins of a few.

Second, get to the bottom of this leak. A couple of brave examinees have already come forward to volunteer what they know. Investigators must pick up the trail from there and follow it to where it leads. Let us not forget that a terrible crime has been committed here, as a result of which a great injustice hangs over the head of those who legitimately passed the exams. Left hanging, this issue will only aggravate the moral indifference that already afflicts our society.

Third, and finally, review the whole system of professional eligibility examinations, with particular attention to its present vulnerabilities. Such a study could take a look into the following: (1) the wisdom of appointing examiners who are also lecturers at review centers; (2) the proliferation of independent review centers that are not subject to any form of regulation by relevant authorities; (3) the knowledgeability of the examiners—not just in the subjects assigned to them but also in the whole science of preparing test questions; (4) the adequacy of existing test banks—in particular, the extent to which these are regularly revisited, evaluated and replenished.

In pursuing the needed reforms, we should not be blind to the subtle dangers posed by excessive fixation on tests. When the knowledge that schools impart to their students becomes primarily geared to passing licensure exams, they often forget to teach what is essential to the thoughtful practice of a profession. But, perhaps, there is an even more basic lesson here. When entrepreneurs build a whole profitable industry around one profession, like nursing, the distortion it brings not only exacerbates the defects of our educational system, it tests the integrity of our whole culture.


** MR. Ang you should read this! Puro kasi pagkakaperahan nasa utak mo!**

Mr. Dante Ang is rich, famous, intelligent, but he seems a square peg in a round hole in the Task Force, which is not necessarily his fault. He was merely appointed to it.

He might have become part of the problem in the nursing scandal. He unwittingly showed lack of sensitivity to the sentiments of 17,000 innocent passers when he prematurely announced right at the start without benefit of careful study and evaluation that there should be RETAKE of TWO subjects. Now, he is saying only ONE should be retaken.

A retake is ill-advised because it will create more problems for many of us. The 17,000 passers will lose the jobs available to them right now--nurses from other countries will get them. Then, in the next exam, the present 42,000 examinees (passers and non-passers) will be joined by perhaps another 20,000 new examinees. In short, at that time, 17,000 examinees will be unduly added as competitors to other examinees. This will be a great disadvantge to the present 25,000 non-passers who will do a retake. This is what they will get if the 17,000 will be asked to retake--much more STIFF COMPETITION after the next exam!

Anyway, going back to Mr. Ang, his job involves overseas Filipino workers, including nurses. I wish what he saw in TV on the Lebanon war registered something to him--and to other government officials concerned for that matter. I hope he gathered from TV newscasts the MAJOR PROBLEMS of our workers abroad: INHUMAN TREATMENT BY THEIR FOREIGN EMPLOYERS, LIKE PHYSICAL ABUSE, RAPE, OVER-EXTENDED WORKING HOURS, UNDERPAYMENT OR EVEN NON-PAYMENT OF SALARIES (their salaries should be deposited by their employers in banks so there will be verifiable records of proper or improper payments of their salaries in case of complaints), ETC.

If Mr. Ang cares, he should do something about the OFW problems. If these are not directly under his responsibility, he should still do something--we call it MALASAKIT--by referring the problems to the PRESIDENT no less, and to others concerned.

The Philippine Government joined WTO and embraced globalization. But our ECONOMISTS did not see what was terribly wrong into what we are going into. We agreed to TRADE LIBERALIZATION OF PRODUCTS but we do not have significant PRODUCT EXPORTS compared to other countries. Our main export is LABOR, but it was NOT included in liberalization!!! Moreveor, we brought down our tariff rates to levels not yet required--we overdid it--to the jeopardy of our manufacturers and producers! So we are at the short end of the bargain.

What we should have done right at the start, and what we should do RIGHT now because we did not do it then, is to join hands with other affected Asian nations and work for the inclusion of the PROTECTION OF WORKERS of labor-exporting counries (like the Philippines, Indonesia, India, etc.) in the GLOBALIZATION PACKAGE or PROTOCOL AMONG WTO NATIONS. For non-WTO nations, we should work for bilateral or multilateral agreements on the matter.
If Mr. Dante Ang will use his intelligence and spend his energies in this direction, he will serve our country much more and he will become a hero not just to the OFW's but to the entire nation.

MLT
8-27-06