- Joined
- Apr 19, 2003
- Messages
- 1,093
- Reaction score
- 3
Just an update to let everyone know that Governor Davis signed California Senate Bill 361 on September 25th, thus revising the California licensure examination process.
The actual text of the approved bill is available here: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0351-0400/sb_361_bill_20030926_chaptered.pdf
The following is a little "blurb" I received from my school's email regarding the bill (I didn't write it
):
SB361, which is expected to be signed by Governor Davis, includes a provision to revise the licensure examination process. Replacing the existing California exam will be a two part exam - part 1 is the NAPLEX; part 2 is a unique California jurisprudence exam. Under the bill, anyone taking the NAPLEX after Jan 1, 2004 can use the results of that test to satisfy part 1 of the new examination requirements. They will still have to take part 2, which, under the bill, is required to contain certain components, including a test of communications skills and application of knowledge to clinical situations in addition to testing knowledge of California and federal pharmacy law. The testing sections of SB361 described above were written in compliance with existing CPhA House of Delegates policy and CPhA supports their adoption.
This bill does NOT allow reciprocity, which we take to mean recognition of licensure in one state (e.g. Georgia) as a basis for licensure in California. All applicants for licensure in California are required to meet the examination requirements above. To clarify, if someone takes the NAPLEX in Jan 2004 in Georgia, the results can be used to meet that portion of the California requirement; if that person took the NAPLEX in 1999, they will have to take it again after Jan 1, 2004 for the results to be used in California. This is significant because the NAPLEX is being revised and the "new" version will be more challenging than the old. In any case, an applicant will still need to take part 2 of the exam, which is written by the California Board but will be administered by NABP.
The actual text of the approved bill is available here: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0351-0400/sb_361_bill_20030926_chaptered.pdf
The following is a little "blurb" I received from my school's email regarding the bill (I didn't write it
):SB361, which is expected to be signed by Governor Davis, includes a provision to revise the licensure examination process. Replacing the existing California exam will be a two part exam - part 1 is the NAPLEX; part 2 is a unique California jurisprudence exam. Under the bill, anyone taking the NAPLEX after Jan 1, 2004 can use the results of that test to satisfy part 1 of the new examination requirements. They will still have to take part 2, which, under the bill, is required to contain certain components, including a test of communications skills and application of knowledge to clinical situations in addition to testing knowledge of California and federal pharmacy law. The testing sections of SB361 described above were written in compliance with existing CPhA House of Delegates policy and CPhA supports their adoption.
This bill does NOT allow reciprocity, which we take to mean recognition of licensure in one state (e.g. Georgia) as a basis for licensure in California. All applicants for licensure in California are required to meet the examination requirements above. To clarify, if someone takes the NAPLEX in Jan 2004 in Georgia, the results can be used to meet that portion of the California requirement; if that person took the NAPLEX in 1999, they will have to take it again after Jan 1, 2004 for the results to be used in California. This is significant because the NAPLEX is being revised and the "new" version will be more challenging than the old. In any case, an applicant will still need to take part 2 of the exam, which is written by the California Board but will be administered by NABP.
