ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Chris Musillo on Nurse and Allied Health Immigration

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

Rate this Entry
 


 

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.

 

Read the full Healthcare and Immigration Law Blog at www.musillo.com or www.ilw.com.

Submit "What is Submit "What is Submit "What is Submit "What is Submit "What is Submit "What is Submit "What is

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags

Comments

Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: