Laura Allen over at
Massage Collage writes that the
NCBTMB is going to start requiring some prospective therapists who need to retake the National Certification Exam to complete additional hours of study. Fail the test three times and you'll have to complete 100 more hours of education before you can retake the test. Fail five times and you'll have to take 500 more hours of classes.
Now, it would make sense to most of us that if a person can't pass the certification exam then maybe they need more education. But as Laura points out, "The average number of first-time test-takers who pass the National Certification Exam is 70%." That figure seems awfully low. So is the problem with the test-takers, the schools they attended or with the exam itself?
Laura and many others believe that a lot of the blame lies at the feet of the massage schools. Many of these schools seem to promise brilliant massage careers, charge exorbitant
tuition and then fail to provide the students with the knowledge not only to pass the certification exam but to survive in a competitive market. Even those who learn the ins and outs of massage competently may not be taught the test taking skills necessary to pass a standardized test like the
NCE.
Laura feels that these schools should be held responsible for the pass rates of their students, even be required to publish them so potential students can compare their chances with different schools. This is not a bad idea. In my research I've run across several college websites that publish their graduates' pass rates for various exams often comparing their results with the national average.
But how do massage students compare to other test takers. Here are a few numbers I've found in just a few minutes on the web:
According to my totally unscientific research and calculations (my statistics prof better not see this) that would put the pass rates for first-time
NCE takers just about 10% (that's probably not right, but I'll be the first to admit that I suck at math) under the national average for all exam takers.
I'm not saying we can't do better; I'm just saying that maybe all this hand wringing over low pass rates is unwarranted. Maybe standardized tests just suck and should not be used as the sole criterion for licensing and certification--especially in a profession that attracts more
Feelers than Thinkers.