Part I scores are UP!!

This forum made possible through the generous support of
SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
JMU07

JMU07

Full Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
1,152
Reaction score
2
The national passing rate was 72%. Not bad for the new "multiple answer" questions. Schools will find out in the next week or two their own passing rates. SCO always posts theirs on their website, but not all schools do this.

Yeah, I passed. :D
Members don't see this ad.
 
Where did you find the national pass rate stats?
 
Right beside your score, where it says Mar 2011 - click on that and scroll to the bottom. It also has the pass/fail cutoff score and your raw score as well, plus a more specific breakdown of your scores by section!
 
Members don't see this ad :)
JMU07 said:
The national passing rate was 72%. Not bad for the new "multiple answer" questions. Schools will find out in the next week or two their own passing rates. SCO always posts theirs on their website, but not all schools do this.

Yeah, I passed. :D
Click to expand...

Doesn't that mean that 28% of test takers failed? That's quite a large percentage if you ask me.

I'm curious to see the passing rates of the newer schools...please post this if possible.
 
Only 72% pass rate? Looks like NBEO staff are all getting bonus checks this year. Congrats to those that made the cut, especially you KHE
 
Ya, 72% seems pretty low to me too. I don't where it is normally though.
 
cjensen20 said:
how did everyone do on their boards?

how did your school do?


yeah, typically the pass rate is way higher...but this year NBEO made the test more difficult with multiple answers
Click to expand...

I go to ICO and passed. I heard the national pass rate dropped %20 from last year, which is a pretty shocking number to me. I guess the new multiple response questions and a whole new pool of questions made a big difference.

The individual schools won't know their passing rates for a few weeks from my understanding.
 
If I'm reading this right, it looks like last year's pass rate for the first time through (which will be lower than if you include any retakes) was 85.1% and the year before that was 87.3%. So a 72% national pass rate for the 1st test is significantly lower than other years.
 
I'm sure because of multiple response, a lot more questions were thrown out this year as well... Yay for the P though...
 
It's because of the multiple answer questions. When they changed Part I a few years ago to make it more clinically relevant, the national pass rate dropped a lot then, too. I think that was 3 or 4 years ago. I think next year it'll go back up because they'll make changes to the test. Whether they'll keep those multiple answer questions or not, or at least give partial credit, I don't know.

Schools will know their passing rates in a couple weeks. Keep in mind that not all schools release their first-time pass rate info, or at least not publicly on their website.
 
I PASSED TOO!!!

CHEERS TO EVERYONE WHO PASSED :thumbup:
 
Members don't see this ad :)
JMU07 said:
It's because of the multiple answer questions. When they changed Part I a few years ago to make it more clinically relevant, the national pass rate dropped a lot then, too. I think that was 3 or 4 years ago. I think next year it'll go back up because they'll make changes to the test. Whether they'll keep those multiple answer questions or not, or at least give partial credit, I don't know.

Schools will know their passing rates in a couple weeks. Keep in mind that not all schools release their first-time pass rate info, or at least not publicly on their website.
Click to expand...

I know little of the "new" board exam but when I took part one nearly 15 years ago, the national average pass rate at that time was consistently in the high 60s low 70s in terms of percentage.
 
I passed too! I'm so relieved. Congrats to everyone that passed. It was a tough one. It will be interesting to see the stats for each school.
 
I go to ICO too, and I PASSED!!!!!!!
OMG, it is such a relief!!! The scores were released actually while we were having class on Tuesday. After word got out, it just spread like wildfire via whispers and ppl handing each other iphones so ppl can check their scores. It was a sight to be seen.

I actually didnt check my score until today (Sat.) since we had out LAST final this afternoon, and i needed to do well on that one. Its 3AM here now, n I was soooo darn relieved and happy when i saw that P!!

so the exam was taken out of 486? that means NBEO dropped 14 questions, cuz there are 500 total questions on the exam?
 
Yes msjang, they did drop 14 questions. Not nearly as many as they dropped last year.

Cjenson20: I did the KMK course and it was really good. Yes, I could have studied my own notes as they taught me everything I needed to know. But, it was really nice having somebody organize my notes for me. It was also nice them telling me which parts to study the most and which parts to spend less time on (although this would be pretty easy to figure out form the NBEO matrix that they put out).
 
Oogilily said:
Cjenson20: I did the KMK course and it was really good. Yes, I could have studied my own notes as they taught me everything I needed to know. But, it was really nice having somebody organize my notes for me. It was also nice them telling me which parts to study the most and which parts to spend less time on (although this would be pretty easy to figure out form the NBEO matrix that they put out).
Click to expand...

do you think KMK nailed it...even with the changes for this test?

do you still need you book/material? would you be willing to part with it?

Real Salt Lake! there you go! my 'hometeam'
 
JMU07 said:
It's because of the multiple answer questions. When they changed Part I a few years ago to make it more clinically relevant, the national pass rate dropped a lot then, too. I think that was 3 or 4 years ago.
Click to expand...

Oogilily said:
Yes msjang, they did drop 14 questions. Not nearly as many as they dropped last year.
Click to expand...


When Part I was made more "clinically relevant" starting in 2009, the pass rate went up. Previous to 2009, Part I was primarily held in August (pretty much all first time test takers) and the secondary test was in December (pretty much all repeating test takers). In March 2009, this newer test was administered for the first time with the secondary test being held in August. They now called the test "Applied Basic Science" where it was previously called "Basic Science".

Also, the number of dropped items this year is higher than it was for the other two administrations of the new "ABS" presumably due to poor performance on the multiple-item questions.

Here is a history of the targeted administration of Part I:
Administration Date/ First-time test taker pass rates/ Dropped Items
Aug 2000 BS/ 82.10%
Aug 2001 BS/ 77.70%
Aug 2002 BS/ 79.88%
Aug 2003 BS/ 74.92%
Aug 2004 BS/ 75.69%
Aug 2005 BS/ 82.07%
Aug 2006 BS/ 86.18%
Aug 2007 BS/ 84.24%
Aug 2008 BS/ 67.00% <------Not many ppl took the test on this date => number less relevant
Mar 2009 ABS/ 91.90%/ 7
Mar 2010 ABS/ 92.10%/ 3
Mar 2011 ABS/ 72.00%/ 14

I was trying to get the formatting of the above information to look better, but the above is the best I could do.
This information may be freely obtained from the NBEO on their website: http://www.optometry.org/stats.cfm

EDIT: the 72% is an overall pass-rate not first-time test takers, so the numbers are not comparable. We need to wait to see how first-time candidates did before comparing numbers.
 
Last edited:
@somnief

so you are saying that the % in red
Mar 2009 ABS/ 91.90%/ 7
Mar 2010 ABS/ 92.10%/ 3
Mar 2011 ABS/ 72.00%/ 14

are "First-time test taker pass rates"
but the 72% is not?

So would the 85.1% national pass rate for last year be the overall pass rate (including both first-time test takers and retakes)? [The faculty who is in charge of tallying pass rates for ICO told us the same # too, 85% as national pass rate last year].

So that means we can compare 85.1% and 72%, right? If so, this year's pass rate was definitely significantly lower than last year's..
 
cjensen20 said:
do you think KMK nailed it...even with the changes for this test?

do you still need you book/material? would you be willing to part with it?

Real Salt Lake! there you go! my 'hometeam'
Click to expand...



I thought KMK did a good job. They missed some things and nailed others, no way they could nail everything. Just buying the books used is only kind of worth it. The classes they give are worth it because they narrow down the material into something more manageable to study. You won't get that just by studying the books on your own. And ya, I actually still need the books, so I'm not willing to part with them :)

And go RSL! My home team too. Too bad we lost Morales for the season....
 
No, the 72% IS the first-time pass rate. Makeups for part I are in August.

KMK was really good. I almost didn't do it but I would have been SO overwhelmed trying to learn everything from my class notes. I'd recommended it to everyone. Like someone else said, they nailed some things and missed others, but they aren't affiliated with the NBEO and don't know any more about the test than what the NBEO provides on their website for everyone else to see.
 
Congrats to all... HUGE dropoff from last year.. wow.. NBEO is trying to shake things up a little bit..
 
msjang said:
@somnief

so you are saying that the % in red
Mar 2009 ABS/ 91.90%/ 7
Mar 2010 ABS/ 92.10%/ 3
Mar 2011 ABS/ 72.00%/ 14

are "First-time test taker pass rates"
but the 72% is not?

So would the 85.1% national pass rate for last year be the overall pass rate (including both first-time test takers and retakes)? [The faculty who is in charge of tallying pass rates for ICO told us the same # too, 85% as national pass rate last year].

So that means we can compare 85.1% and 72%, right? If so, this year's pass rate was definitely significantly lower than last year's..
Click to expand...


Yes, you got it. After the scores have been released, NBEO takes some time to do a statistical analysis and releases the results on the aforementioned website. There were some people taking the most recent test in March 2011 that had taken it in the past (and presumably failed in the past). Those test-takers hold the overall average down some. After the statistical analysis, we'll more easily be able to see how this test compares to the last 10 years.

I can attest to the 85% overall pass-rate from March 2010 (and the 92.10% for first-timers) as well as the most current overall 72% in March 2011. There was an overall dip in passing students by ~13% from last year to this.
 
We just got informed that the pass rate for ICO for this calendar year was 91%. Not too shabby.
 
JMU07 said:
No, the 72% IS the first-time pass rate. Makeups for part I are in August.
Click to expand...


72% is for all test takers, not just first-timers. The first-time pass rate was 78%, SCO was at 77% this year.
 
BYUIDoctor said:
72% is for all test takers, not just first-timers. The first-time pass rate was 78%, SCO was at 77% this year.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I got that after Dr. Reich's email. Thanks. ;)
 
Congrats to you all who passed Part I. I have a question, after reading some of the posts, several people mentioned using KMK. When "they missed" some points..do you mean the actual text's didn't have adeqate information OR the lecture portion did not emphasize those areas? I bought the 2 books for Part I. I am stuying hard this summer and any advice would be GREATLY appreciated.

Thank you all!
 
DrSpontaneouz83 said:
Congrats to you all who passed Part I. I have a question, after reading some of the posts, several people mentioned using KMK. When "they missed" some points..do you mean the actual text's didn't have adeqate information OR the lecture portion did not emphasize those areas? I bought the 2 books for Part I. I am stuying hard this summer and any advice would be GREATLY appreciated.

Thank you all!
Click to expand...

I think ever since the "cheat scandal", the NBEO has been trying to go against the grain with it's testing so that no one has an advantage so to say. I keep hearing that they tested completely the opposite subject matter that KMK was preparing students to test on.

totally unfair IMO, and NBEO needs some stability.. seems like each class will be a guinea pig to something new. It sucks.
 
I wouldn't worry about the board pass rate. The ophthalmology board pass rate is 70% for the written and about 65% for the oral exam. I think the key is to set a standard for the profession and if people can't reach it, that is too bad. At the end of the day, the boards and standards are set to protect the patients, not the doctors.
 
thiaeyemd said:
I wouldn't worry about the board pass rate. The ophthalmology board pass rate is 70% for the written and about 65% for the oral exam. I think the key is to set a standard for the profession and if people can't reach it, that is too bad. At the end of the day, the boards and standards are set to protect the patients, not the doctors.
Click to expand...

I can't really agree with that.

Optometry "boards" and ophthalmology boards measure two different things. Optometry boards being spoken of here are tests for initial licensure. As such, they are supposed to test minimum competency. That is....what is the minimum competency a person needs to not be a danger to the public.

Ophthalmology boards are designed to test competency above and beyond initial licensure. You don't need to be board certified to practice as an ophthalmologist. Now....I get that most ophthalmologists are board certified so it's basically becoming a defacto licensing exam but at it's core, it's a different test.

Anyone who sets a test can set one where everyone aces it or one where everyone fails it. Neither of those situations are desirable.
 
I respectfully disagree. The ophthalmology boards test minimum competency and are a licensure exam. Considering that no insurance company will cover you if are not board certified or eligible effectively limits ones practice if not board certified. As an ophthalmologist, I am not sure how you would practice if you didn't take insurance..(Unless you established yourself for years and people would be willing to pay cash..which is rare) The oral and written exams for ophthalmology are supposed to test the same level...minimum amount of knowledge to not hurt people. I agree that the standard can be tweaked by the powers that be to limit the number of ophthalmologists being board certified but in concept for what level is being tested, I think the tests are similar.
 
thiaeyemd said:
I respectfully disagree. The ophthalmology boards test minimum competency and are a licensure exam. Considering that no insurance company will cover you if are not board certified or eligible effectively limits ones practice if not board certified. As an ophthalmologist, I am not sure how you would practice if you didn't take insurance..(Unless you established yourself for years and people would be willing to pay cash..which is rare) The oral and written exams for ophthalmology are supposed to test the same level...minimum amount of knowledge to not hurt people. I agree that the standard can be tweaked by the powers that be to limit the number of ophthalmologists being board certified but in concept for what level is being tested, I think the tests are similar.
Click to expand...

Well that's just it. Is there a test to be board eligible? I did not think so so please correct me if I"m wrong.

Assuming for a second that there's not, that effectively means you can practice as an ophthalmologist without being board certified.

Leaving that technicality aside though.....is your board certification exams designed as tests of minimum competency?
 
I think the boards are considered minimum competency. I guess you could practice as an ophthalmologist if you are not board certified or eligible but you would end up working for free unless you just did refractions all day etc..Alternatively you could work for someone else as a glorified technician but you aren't really practicing as an ophthalmololgist then, I see your point but I think the boards for us is the minimum standard of competency. I wouldnt send my family member to someone who wasn't board certified or eligible to be honest. I don't know anyone who would elect to not take the boards and be certified. The only people who aren't certfied took the tests and failed. What you are saying is correct..it isn't needed to practice technically but in reality you are not able to sustain yourself...thus by setting a certain standard on the exam, the AAO sets a standard of 99.9% of ophthalmologists who are practicing.
 
thiaeyemd said:
I think the boards are considered minimum competency. I guess you could practice as an ophthalmologist if you are not board certified or eligible but you would end up working for free unless you just did refractions all day etc..Alternatively you could work for someone else as a glorified technician but you aren't really practicing as an ophthalmololgist then, I see your point but I think the boards for us is the minimum standard of competency. I wouldnt send my family member to someone who wasn't board certified or eligible to be honest. I don't know anyone who would elect to not take the boards and be certified. The only people who aren't certfied took the tests and failed. What you are saying is correct..it isn't needed to practice technically but in reality you are not able to sustain yourself...thus by setting a certain standard on the exam, the AAO sets a standard of 99.9% of ophthalmologists who are practicing.
Click to expand...

How long is the period of board eligibility generally? Are people board eligible as soon as they are done residency or does it require a certain amount of experience?
 
DawgOD said:
I think ever since the "cheat scandal", the NBEO has been trying to go against the grain with it's testing so that no one has an advantage so to say. I keep hearing that they tested completely the opposite subject matter that KMK was preparing students to test on.

totally unfair IMO, and NBEO needs some stability.. seems like each class will be a guinea pig to something new. It sucks.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that really sucks for everyone who has yet to take the boards. I'm going to sit for it in March. Some people who took KMK from my school said it worked, but others say you definitely shouldn't limit yourself to just KMK. I was also told the "Ophthalmic Dispensing" textbook is definitely worth reading carefully and you'd better understand theory moreso rather than formulas. Grrr...guess basically study anything you can get your hands on haha. :xf:
 
board eligibility is three years after graduation. The written and oral exam are separated by a year so one could fail one component once and then become board certified within the three years. If you don't take the boards or fail more than once one section you are no longer eligibile. You have to do remediation (not sure wht that means exactly) before you can sit for both all over again. Thus, you could practice for three years without taking the boards but you basically screwed yourself
 
thiaeyemd said:
board eligibility is three years after graduation. The written and oral exam are separated by a year so one could fail one component once and then become board certified within the three years. If you don't take the boards or fail more than once one section you are no longer eligibile. You have to do remediation (not sure wht that means exactly) before you can sit for both all over again. Thus, you could practice for three years without taking the boards but you basically screwed yourself
Click to expand...

So in that case, how can your board exam be a test of minimum competency because you basically turn people who are (at least in theory) not minimally competent loose on the public for 3 years before they pass their exam?

I'm not trying to argue technicalities. I'm trying to understand the rationality for ophthalmology board certification as a test of "minimum competency" other than the issue of insurance reimbursement.
 
you are right that is technically true but since the board process takes two years to complete you need to allow people to earn a living while passing the board exam. The people who are practicing just haven't been tested for their competency yet..not that they are not minimally competent. I would venture to say that most ophthalmologists consider the boards a basic standard of practice. In most practices if one doesn't pass their boards they are usually let go. In our world if also one doesn't pass the board people would view you in a questionable light. Yes you are right that for three years you are free wheeling on people. It used to be that the boards were taken inthe last year of residency but that was changed for some reason. Boards were not created so we coulld be on insurance panels but more so was set as a standard for the insurance companies after they recongnized that 95% of ophthalmologists were board certified and thus wanted to have that standard offered to their patients. In the 80s it didnt matter if you were board certified but now it does. The boards were created to create a minimum standard to say "Hey if you passed these tests you are at a certain level that is the minimum to be a fellow of the AAO and what the ophthalmology world considers the minimum". It isn't a feather in your cap or something extra for sure.. I think if it is not viewed as a minimum competency then it is really a bonus or an extra thing. The latter is definitely not true at all. Just how we view it.
 
Last edited:
thiaeyemd said:
you are right that is technically true but since the board process takes two years to complete you need to allow people to earn a living while passing the board exam. The people who are practicing just haven't been tested for their competency yet..not that they are not minimally competent. I would venture to say that most ophthalmologists consider the boards a basic standard of practice. In most practices if one doesn't pass their boards they are usually let go. In our world if also one doesn't pass the board people would view you in a questionable light. Yes you are right that for three years you are free wheeling on people. It used to be that the boards were taken inthe last year of residency but that was changed for some reason. Boards were not created so we coulld be on insurance panels but more so was set as a standard for the insurance companies after they recongnized that 95% of ophthalmologists were board certified and thus wanted to have that standard offered to their patients. In the 80s it didnt matter if you were board certified but now it does. The boards were created to create a minimum standard to say "Hey if you passed these tests you are at a certain level that is the minimum to be a fellow of the AAO and what the ophthalmology world considers the minimum". It isn't a feather in your cap or something extra for sure.. I think if it is not viewed as a minimum competency then it is really a bonus or an extra thing. The latter is definitely not true at all. Just how we view it.
Click to expand...

I really think you two got off track a little bit. OD boards are like our Steps, assuming GPs still existed. Pass all the parts and you can get licensed to practice. Optometry is working on a board certification similar to what we use, buts its not around just yet.
 
KHE said:
I'm not trying to argue technicalities. I'm trying to understand the rationality for ophthalmology board certification as a test of "minimum competency" other than the issue of insurance reimbursement.
Click to expand...

The rationale is for the American Board of Ophthalmology to make some CASH MONEY. $1650 for the written qualifiying exam, if you pass, $1650 for the oral exam. Then if you are Board Certified, the certification runs out in 10 years (unless you were grandfathered in which happens if you were board certified by 2000, I think). To prevent the certification from running out you need to participate in the MOC (Maintainance of Certification) which purports; "Hospitals, health care systems and other credentialing organizations use MOC as a physician quality indicator." Over those ten years it will cost you $775 for the office record review (ORR), and $775 for the demonstration of ophthalmic knowledge (DOCK).

So other than making money for the ABOP the stamp of Board Certification means you are of better quality than someone else (at least according to the test). I think by just by completing a residency you will have "minimum competency", board certifiction means you have jumped through more hoops to prove you are more capable from a knowledge standpoint than another non-boarded ophthalmologist. Of note, while insurance companies and hospitals ask if you are board certified I know of at least 2 docs in my area that are not board certified, both in practice 10+ years, that have privileges to see patients and operate at our local hospital.
 
Those docs were probably grandfathered in...most insurance companies will not cover you in NY/NJ unless you are board certified or eligible. It makes sense that they were in practice over 10 years.

Though the costs of board certification are high, the AAO does not make a profit off of it. It is done for patient safety and establishing a standard. Consider the costs to maintain, validate and examine ophthalmologists. It is not cheap and that money has to come from somewhere.

In terms of what it means, I think in the ophthalmology world it is pretty well understood that if someone is not board certified there is sort of a question mark next to their knowledge. Yes technically a real knowledgeable person could choose not to take the boards but most of the people who are not boarded have essentially taken and failed the exam multiple times. Anyone can have a bad test day but people who can't get through the boards are just at a different knowledge level in my opinion. Though residency establishes minimum competency surgically, it doesn't knowledgewise. You shouldn't graduate if you don't know enough but most chairmen and program directors figure the boards will take care of that person.
 
hey, Im curious

is there a place that shows what the national pass rate was for part one from the past two attempts?

then is there a place that would show how individual schools did?

or, are there any sort of statistics report?

thanks
 
Makes sense the pass rate has declined, more schools open means more optometrists out on the field, so a way to help the problem (even if a little)?

Make the test more difficult!

Or it could be a simple matter of students that are weak academically getting into optometry schools since admissions has become much easier than in the past.
 
cjensen20 said:
hey, Im curious

is there a place that shows what the national pass rate was for part one from the past two attempts?

then is there a place that would show how individual schools did?

or, are there any sort of statistics report?

thanks
Click to expand...

National pass rates might be floating around on the NBEO website but as for individual schools, not all of them release their pass rates publicly. You'd have to call and ask.
 
HPDV6000 said:
Makes sense the pass rate has declined, more schools open means more optometrists out on the field, so a way to help the problem (even if a little)?

Make the test more difficult!

Or it could be a simple matter of students that are weak academically getting into optometry schools since admissions has become much easier than in the past.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't put too much emphasis on one administration of the exam. If a trend develops, maybe you are on to something.
 
Congradulations to all those that past!

I am in the process of studying to write my board exam. I am really worry as the exam looks really complicated. I was wondering if any optoms out there still have the study notes/practice questions that help you to study for the board exam. It would be greatly appreciated if you can send me those study notes. This would help me greatly.

You can reply to me in here if you have anything that can help me with board exam and you can send it to my email address.

Many thanks for your help! Much appreciated.

John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

A
Nbeo part 1 scores
Replies
0
Views
355
amcoptom
A
Penny Laporta
NBEO part 1 advice
Replies
1
Views
2K
shevchenko277
shevchenko277
E
NBEO PART 3 HELP
Replies
3
Views
3K
eyegirl2023
E
O
Nbeo part 1 help!!!
Replies
1
Views
4K
Opto25
O
T
When do NBEO PART 3 scores come out
Replies
1
Views
1K
FutureOD22
F
Top