CGFNS OFFICIAL STATEMENT RE: APPLICATION OF JUNE 2006 NLE EXAMINEES
Commission on Graduates of Foreign Nursing Schools (CGFNS International) Statement Regarding VisaScreen® Eligibility of Philippine Nurses Taking the Professional Regulation Commission's (PRC's) June 2006 Nursing Licensing Exam
http://www.cgfns.org/sections/press/news/2006/10-25-06_vs.shtml
PHILADELPHIA, PA — OCTOBER 26, 2006 — The Board of Trustees of the Commission on Graduates of Foreign Nursing Schools (CGFNS International) met October 22-23, 2006 and considered whether Philippine nurses who have passed the Professional Regulation Commission's (PRC) June 2006 nursing licensing exam are eligible for VisaScreen® Certification.
The Board directed its staff and counsel to review and assess whether the licensure process followed in light of the challenged results of the June 2006 exam is "comparable" with that required for nurses licensed in America, as required by U.S. law. CGFNS will then make a final determination of whether passers of the June 2006 exam are eligible for VisaScreen® certification. CGFNS expects to reach a final decision on the question of comparability in the near future. Any VisaScreen® applications that CGFNS receives from June 2006 passers will be accepted but deferred for a final decision until this assessment process is complete. If the assessment concludes that the license is not comparable, the VisaScreen® application from a June 2006 passer will be denied.
http://www.cgfns.org/sections/press/news/2006/10-25-06_vs.shtml
PHILADELPHIA, PA — OCTOBER 26, 2006 — The Board of Trustees of the Commission on Graduates of Foreign Nursing Schools (CGFNS International) met October 22-23, 2006 and considered whether Philippine nurses who have passed the Professional Regulation Commission's (PRC) June 2006 nursing licensing exam are eligible for VisaScreen® Certification.
The Board directed its staff and counsel to review and assess whether the licensure process followed in light of the challenged results of the June 2006 exam is "comparable" with that required for nurses licensed in America, as required by U.S. law. CGFNS will then make a final determination of whether passers of the June 2006 exam are eligible for VisaScreen® certification. CGFNS expects to reach a final decision on the question of comparability in the near future. Any VisaScreen® applications that CGFNS receives from June 2006 passers will be accepted but deferred for a final decision until this assessment process is complete. If the assessment concludes that the license is not comparable, the VisaScreen® application from a June 2006 passer will be denied.
Whoever Dante Ang talks to will entertain doubts on the competence of 2006 passers. Sadly, he talked to NCLEX and CGFNS people, and this is the result in the case of CGFNS.
Foreigners will believe Dante Ang because he is so passionate for retake, he is so obsessed over it, he is a cabinet rank government official, and foreigners who do not know what is actually happening here have no recourse but to believe him.
But Dante Ang is wrong on many counts. First, he and other complainants are in effect saying that the 2003 bar exams cannot be used as precedent because nursing is different--its job involves matter of life and data. Okay, fine, but we are talking of the leaked questions only--and these complainants never showed us just what are the leaked questions that involved matter of life and death so that FAILURE to answer them will make the 2006 passers dangerous. They cannot show that, and one reason is that the passers in fact passed these questions--whether or not these involved matter of life and death. Those who did not pass in these questions are the non-passers, including some complainants among them who treat as incompetent those who did what they failed to do--passs the exams!!!
Second, he insists on retake of test 3. Is he and Brion out of their minds? Test 3 had 80 valid questions left, so why retake the entire test 3? The 17,000 passers who passed the remaining valid questions acquired vested right over them that cannot be removed from them. If there is a retake of test 3, it should be for 20 questions only corresponding to the leaked questions. By asking for retake of test 3, he played into the hands of flunker-complainants who will now have a chance to nullify their being flunkers on this subject, have a second chance at it at no cost through government-ordered retake, and at the same time exact revenge out of envy to the passers who will then lose their right as passers in this subject.
Third, there are other grounds for no-retake communicated to him, to Malacanang, etc. and he could not even refute them.
DANTE ANG, JOSEFINA TUAZON, TADLE, YANGOT, ETC. --DIYOS NA ANG BAHALA SA INYO. MAKAKARMA DIN KAYO.
AT HUWAG KAYONG MAGKAKAMALING MAGKASAKIT AT MAGPAHOSPITAL SA UST DAHIL GALIT SA INYO ANG PASSERS NG UST, PATI ANG MGA KA-ALLIANCE NILANG IBA PANG NURSES, HE, HE, HE....
Pero ang mga ibang tao, walang problema. In truth, the 2006 passers may yet emerge as a very competent batch in terms of actual practice of the nursing profession--because they have been hurt by many people, and they are determined to prove them wrong, they are determined to show one and all that they passed fair and square, that they are competent, that they are caring, that they are God-fearing--SO HELP THEM GOD.
Posted by
Anonymous |
11:35 PM
The problem with these people who are behind pro-retake, now that they recieved defeat, definitely will start talking at the back and they will surely start telling a lies all about Nursing board passers. They cannot afford to loose and accept the verdict. For them, this is only just the beginning of malicious campaign. They will keep on telling a lies to all corners of the world. Take my word!!!!
Posted by
Anonymous |
12:40 PM