It has to go in a custom footer (not html module) to work*. The source, which also has some interesting thoughts on the desirability of disabling right click, is below: http://javascript.about.com/library/blnoright.htm *Using in a custom footer:replace all code in xslt box with this: ]]>

« Home | Editorials: Conjectures and the ‘retake’ » | CA allows oath-taking of nursing exam passers » | CA: ‘Selective retake’ of nursing board exam 17,32... » | Palace tells PRC chief to shut up on nursing board... » | Palace aide says CA decision ‘fair’ » | CA orders selective retake of nursing board » | CA orders ‘selective retake’ of nursing board exam... » | 'Via satellite' na dayaan ng Gapuz ibinunyag » | Complaint filed vs 17 test review execs » | Learn the right lessons »


QUICKLINKS : CHAT RULES / PINOYBSN FORUM

Court of Appeals orders selective nursing retest

Court of Appeals orders selective nursing retest
spacer

http://www.mb.com.ph/MAIN2006101476983.html


The Court of Appeals (CA) nullified yesterday a resolution of the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) voiding 20 items in Test III and recomputing the scores in Test V in the scandal-ridden Nursing Licensure Examination last June.

Among the court’s specific orders is "a selective re-taking in Test III and V among 1,687 examinees whose names were merely added to the unaltered list of 41.24 per cent successful examinees."

The court also ordered the immediate oath-taking and issuance of licenses to the 41.24 percent of examinees who originally passed the tests, including the 1,186 examinees who actually passed, but whose names were excluded as a result of the invalidation and recomputation of their scores.

Of the 42,006 nursing graduates who took the last June 11 and 12 nursing examination, only 17,821 passed, the PRC said.

Associate Justice Vicente S.E. Veloso penned the decision that was concurred in by Presiding Justice Ruben T. Reyes and Associate Justice Juan Q. Enriquez Jr.

The decision granted the petitions and petition-in-intervention filed by the University of Santo Tomas College of Nursing Faculty Association, the League of Concerned Nurses, the Binuklod na Samahan ng mga Student Nurses, and the Presidential Task Force on National Licensure Examination, headed by Dante A. Ang.

Named respondents were the PRC and the Board of Nursing.

The CA ruled:

" Wherefore, the petition is granted declaring Resolution No. 31, Series of 2006 as null and void, a writ of prohibition is hereby issued permanently enjoining the respondents from implementing the said resolution. Granting further the incidental reliefs required under the premises, and respondents are hereby directed:

"1. to conduct a selective re-taking in Test III and V among the 1,687 examinees whose names were merely added to the unaltered list of 41.24 per cent successful examinees;

"2. to restore the names of the 1,186 successful examinees and include them again in the list of 41.24 per cent who actually passed the June 11 and 12, 2006 Nursing Licensure Examination (NLE);

"3. to cause the oathtaking and issuance of licenses to all the 41.24 per cent successful examinees as herein reconstituted.

"This disquisition is without prejudice to respondents’ and the Executive Branch’s revoking the licenses issued to examinees who may eventually be identified as among those who attended the final coaching sessions at Gapuz, Inress, and Pentagon Review centers."

http://www.mb.com.ph/MAIN2006101476983.html

The CA, however, denied the petitioners’ plea for a wholesale retaking of Test III and V to protect and maintain the integrity of the NLE.

"In sum, it is our view that while the petitioners and intervenors deserve the writ of prohibition insofar as concerns Resolution No. 31, they, however, are not entitled to the relief of a wholesale retaking of Tests III and V of the June 2006 Nursing Licensure Examination," the CA stressed.

In nullifying Resolution No. 31, the CA noted that the PRC and Board of Nursing admitted in its memorandum that "usual telltale signs of cheating or benefit obtained from the leakage were not at all visible."

The CA added that the "whereas" clauses in Resolution No. 31 indicated that there is no need to wholly invalidate 20 questions of Test III and to tone down the weight of Test V from 20 percent to 10 percent.

"There was no need for the respondents to ignore the true results of Test III and V because as admitted by PRC and BON in their memorandum, ‘there was no usual upward pull in Tests III and V, no clustering of scores, no remarkable rise in the performance of the regional examination sites, no widespread leakage, and no preponderant evidence on who knowingly benefited from the 90 leaked questions based on the test results’," the CA stressed.

"The tests that were conducted outside of Manila and Baguio were observed by both the respondents and the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) to have been clean. The successful examinees thereat are therefore entitled to an immediate oath taking and license," the appellate court added

The CA said the PRC and Board of Nursing (BON) committed grave abuse of discretion when it issued Resolution No. 31 increasing the passing rate of the June 11, and 12, 2006 examinations from 41.24 percent to 42.42 percent.

"Such increase of 1.18 percent which benefited 1,687 examinees who actually failed (as their names did not appear in the unaltered results) but who resultantly passed when the Ibe Formula was introduced, constitutes a clear case of grave abuse of discretion," the decision stated.

But the CA noted the application of the said formula also resulted in the dropping of 1,186 new nurses from the list of successful examinees.

"Indeed the act of failing 1,186 examinees who actually passed in the June 11 and June 12, 2006 examination is a serious, if not gravest abuse of discretion one can imagine," the CA said.

The CA likewise branded as "whimsical and capricious" the issuance of the said resolution as it allowed the 1,687 examinees to pass "without satisfying" the standards set by the Nursing Act of 2002 on how examinees may be rated in a licensure examination.

It, however, agreed with the NBI’s findings that there were examinees who attended the "final coaching session" of Gapuz, Inress and Pentagon before the NLE who may have benefited from the leakage.

But it stressed that only the examinees who may be identified later by the NBI or PRC and BON to have attended the final coaching should be penalized with retaking Tests III and V.

On the other hand, the CA said those who did not review and those who reviewed but did not attend the final coaching session of the said review centers should be allowed to take their oath and be given their licenses.

http://www.mb.com.ph/MAIN2006101476983.html

napaka naive naman ang court of appeal.....inutil

PRC is wrong!
Vindicated ang mga petitioners.

Kabahan na kayong mga pumasa because of resolution 31.

selective retake?

i think unfair naman yun sa ibang nag attend nga ng final coaching sa mga nabanggit na review centers pero hindi naman umattend ng last two days na review kung saan sinasabi na nagbigay ng mga leak questions.

paano nila malalaman kung yung particular na tao nay iyon ay present nga sa naturang 2 days na final coaching.

tapos, ilalabas pa nila sa newspapers yung mga name ng mga pumasa na magreretake. hindi naman kay binibigyan nila ng kahihiyan yung mga passers na iyon?

you're right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! kung may retake, lahat magretake!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

THANKSGIVING MASS TODAY(SUN) AT 5:30PM AT LORETO CHURCH, EARNSHAW, SAMPALOC, MANILA...BRING FRIENDS AND FAMILIES..INGATZ

Post a Comment


PBSN Forum


Photobucket 

- Video and Image Hosting

Archives

Links