Thursday, September 23, 2010

What is "propensity" and what is "widespread"?

The FSBPT’s September 22, 2010 update to their blog attempts to answer the question, “Why didn’t you stop testing for all candidates?” Their answer, however, should raise significant issues about the logic behind their policy and their standard of review.

The blog posting says that graduates from universities from the four restricted countries – India, Philippines, Pakistan, and Egypt -- have apparently shown a “propensity” toward “widespread” sharing of NPTE questions. The FSBPT has yet to define “propensity” and “widespread” in any dialogue with members of the public and state boards of Physical Therapy. Every time the FSBPT hides behind these vague words, it calls into serious question the FSBPT’s rationale and raises questions of this policy’s true intent.

The FSBPT also says that “the exam itself has not been compromised by any groups beyond the restricted groups". This of course, does not mean that it hasn't been compromised by any individuals within those groups. If compromised questions were exposed to the internet (and every indication is that they were), then individuals beyond the restricted groups have cheated. To say otherwise is disingenuous.

Moreover, since there are many more individuals in non-restricted groups, the standard of review for these groups should be greater because the damage would be far greater. For instance, if there are 1,500 restricted country test takers and 10 percent have cheated, then there are 150 restricted country cheaters.

On the other hand, if there are 15,000 non-restricted country test takers and just 1 percent has cheated, then there are 150 additional cheaters. American patients don’t care about the nationality of the cheaters; they just want all 300 cheaters to be banned from the test. The FSBPT’s program catches the first 150, but does nothing about the second 150.

2 comments:

  1. Nice to hear your views on the matter. There is no rationale behind this action by FSBPT nor behind hte idea of a seperate NPTE for those group PT. I guess it is the Board who is trying to cheat the public by foxing them into thinking something else while they promote some hidden agenda by this order.
    We too had been disscussing about the matter and if u may wish to take a look into it pls.. http://www.physioblasts.org/p/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?5847.last

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks Robin. I'll check it out.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.