How important is a school's NPTE pass rate?

[lemurien]

I was just accepted into Samuel Merritt (SMU) and they seem to have a great program, but I noticed that their NPTE pass rate went down to 84.3% for the class of 2013 (below the national average of 90% for that year). In previous years they were above average.

Does anyone have thoughts about how important a school's pass rates are, especially from those of you getting ready to take/who have taken the exam? Does the statistic speak to how well the school prepares its students, or is there naturally some variety based on individual backgrounds, study strategies etc? (SMU's class size is ~38.) Should this be an important factor in my decision to attend the program?

Many thanks for any advice! (And for any other thoughts on SMU's program generally!)

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Watson27]

Not yet a PT student and have not taken the exam. But when I visited and interviewed at schools that did not have a 100% first time pass rate, I always asked them why it was not 100%. Some programs could tell me exactly what happened: "There were two students who did not pass, one was planning a wedding and the other's father died the week before the exam, etc." While other programs were slightly guarded and couldn't give a straight answer, but always assured me that the ultimate pass rate was 100%... You should also ask a program if they provide any help or resources to students who do not pass. Some programs will pay for a prep course or allow past students to audit courses in order to pass the exam.

When I was choosing a program, NPTE pass rate was not the most important factor. If the school is accredited, then CAPTE thinks they prepare students to pass the exam and become qualified PTs. Programs can have an off year. I think it would be useful to ask SMU why the pass rate went down, and what they are doing to ensure that it is not a problem in the future.

 

[lemurien]

Thanks @Watson27, very helpful.

 

[imallama]

I just graduated from a PT program and passed the boards on my first try, for reference. Ultimately, the pass rate of the boards is important, but as you already realized, there are also lots of other factors that go into that pass rate. Although I passed the boards on my first try, I was that person who was always either barely passing the test or failing it. However, some of my peers who did not struggle through the program as I did, had difficulty passing the boards this past January. In no way does their performance reflect their intelligence, as they were all 3.5+ GPA throughout the program. Instead, I just think it reflects more on their own preparation for the boards.

I think a huge factor in the pass rate of a school is more so on the students side, in terms of work ethic, spending the time getting to understand the concepts, applying concepts to test questions/real life scenarios, etc. Schools can only teach or help their students connect the dots to a certain point, as there are usually a number of ways to treat a number of impairments. I think the goal of the school is to build up the knowledge (aka "tools") of the students first, and then have the student practice applying it in different ways with the ultimate goal of getting the student to become more independent with their learning how to apply the information (hence why most schools are set up as didactic coursework the first year or so, and the other half is internships).

I did an internship at the hospital, where it myself and another PT student who was from SMU. From what I could tell, it's a great program with a heavy emphasis on neuro (respect to anyone who can do that, I know I can't. Neuro is pretty difficult for me) and he was very well prepared for his inpatient acute rotation.

 

[ktachiba]

I just graduated from a PT program and passed the boards on my first try, for reference. Ultimately, the pass rate of the boards is important, but as you already realized, there are also lots of other factors that go into that pass rate. Although I passed the boards on my first try, I was that person who was always either barely passing the test or failing it. However, some of my peers who did not struggle through the program as I did, had difficulty passing the boards this past January. In no way does their performance reflect their intelligence, as they were all 3.5+ GPA throughout the program. Instead, I just think it reflects more on their own preparation for the boards.

I think a huge factor in the pass rate of a school is more so on the students side, in terms of work ethic, spending the time getting to understand the concepts, applying concepts to test questions/real life scenarios, etc. Schools can only teach or help their students connect the dots to a certain point, as there are usually a number of ways to treat a number of impairments. I think the goal of the school is to build up the knowledge (aka "tools") of the students first, and then have the student practice applying it in different ways with the ultimate goal of getting the student to become more independent with their learning how to apply the information (hence why most schools are set up as didactic coursework the first year or so, and the other half is internships).

I did an internship at the hospital, where it myself and another PT student who was from SMU. From what I could tell, it's a great program with a heavy emphasis on neuro (respect to anyone who can do that, I know I can't. Neuro is pretty difficult for me) and he was very well prepared for his inpatient acute rotation.

Do you feel any differently about graduation rate? Like if a school has a low graduation rate. Graduation rate was a big factor for me, and I wanted to be sure it was over 90% (more like 95% to be comfortable).

 

[callmecrazy]

Do you feel any differently about graduation rate? Like if a school has a low graduation rate. Graduation rate was a big factor for me, and I wanted to be sure it was over 90% (more like 95% to be comfortable).

I actually wouldn't put much weight on attrition rates at all. Many students that don't make it through chose to leave on their own because they decided it was the wrong profession, personal life, etc. Others may be dismissed for academic or disciplinary reasons, but I don't see that bearing on other students success at all.

But to answer the OP, yes, that would concern me. 6 out of 38 students not passing is high. I suppose asking the school for an explanation couldn't hurt, but I can't imagine a reason that would comfort me. Passing is partially on you, but there's a reason PT school isn't independent-study. Your program needs to be doing their part to prepare you, identify areas that may prevent you from passing, and get you where you need to be.

And to tie the two together.... I'd suspect programs that have tougher policies for dismissing students (lowering attrition rates) are going to have better pass rates. They've already cut the slack so to speak before you get anywhere near boards. But that's just my own speculation.

 

[ktachiba]

I actually wouldn't put much weight on attrition rates at all. Many students that don't make it through chose to leave on their own because they decided it was the wrong profession, personal life, etc. Others may be dismissed for academic or disciplinary reasons, but I don't see that bearing on other students success at all.

But to answer the OP, yes, that would concern me. 6 out of 38 students not passing is high. I suppose asking the school for an explanation couldn't hurt, but I can't imagine a reason that would comfort me. Passing is partially on you, but there's a reason PT school isn't independent-study. Your program needs to be doing their part to prepare you, identify areas that may prevent you from passing, and get you where you need to be.

And to tie the two together.... I'd suspect programs that have tougher policies for dismissing students (lowering attrition rates) are going to have better pass rates. They've already cut the slack so to speak before you get anywhere near boards. But that's just my own speculation.

Yeah that's true but I've read some threads on here saying how their program tries to cut some students out and have a competitive environment. Maybe it was just a bitter student ranting but I'd rather be safe, so it made me focus on picking a program with a good graduation rate cuz that means the program fosters a friendly environment and wants their students to succeed

 

[lemurien]

Thanks all. Definitely some food for thought.

 

[NewTestament]

I think a huge factor in the pass rate of a school is more so on the students side, in terms of work ethic, spending the time getting to understand the concepts, applying concepts to test questions/real life scenarios, etc. Schools can only teach or help their students connect the dots to a certain point, as there are usually a number of ways to treat a number of impairments. I think the goal of the school is to build up the knowledge (aka "tools") of the students first, and then have the student practice applying it in different ways with the ultimate goal of getting the student to become more independent with their learning how to apply the information.

I think the first-time pass rate at my school is 85% or so. That's not spectacular, but keep in mind some students try to take the NPTE during their final trimester. I don't recommend that.

Ultimate pass rate is more important. It should be >95%. Of course look at the number of students these schools are accepting. If schools are only gradating 36 students every year and the ultimate pass rate is 99%, that's no better than a school like mine that's graduating >150 students and has a ultimate pass rate of 97%. As the OP said, some schools have strict dismissal policies, and some only take the best of the best in terms of academics.

But ultimately students must prepare for the NPTE on their own. They need to buy a study guide, take practice exams, and study the areas they are struggling with. Schools can only do so much to prepare you.

 

[DesertPT]

I agree that the first time pass rate certainly shouldn't be expected to be 100%, but if the ultimate pass rate is not >95% that would be concerning. Less than 95% means that at least 3 or more students in an average size class are never able to pass...at least not within the three years they use to calculate ultimate pass rates...it's all pretty hard to predict though as a lot of times it is due to the individual circumstances of the students and things beyond the school's control...

 

[DesertPT]

If schools are only gradating 36 students every year and the ultimate pass rate is 99%, that's no better than a school like mine that's graduating >500 students and has a ultimate pass rate of 97%.

Was that 500 supposed to be a 50?

 

[NewTestament]

Sorry. 50 students three times a year. The 97% pass rate refers to the last three years, in which >500 students at my school took the exam.

 

[imallama]

Do you feel any differently about graduation rate? Like if a school has a low graduation rate. Graduation rate was a big factor for me, and I wanted to be sure it was over 90% (more like 95% to be comfortable).

My school has a very high graduation rate (including those who are held back), and that is also something to take into consideration. I think that in relation to graduation rates, schools don't want their students to fail out because it reflects their program poorly, and they lose money. So if a school has a low graduation rate, while there are other factors to take into consideration, it could mean a variety of things (i.e. lower tolerance for poorer performing students, or that they don't properly prepare their students, etc.) I think my school has something like a 97-8% graduation rate, but I think that's also because my program did a good job at giving students a second chance while maintaining a high standard (i.e. in order to pass a class/test, must get at least an 80%. If you don't pass a class, you have to repeat it the following year with the class that is a year below you. If you don't pass another class, then you're kicked out from the program.)

To address the attrition rate, my class started out with 37 people, but 3 were held back due to poor academics. 2 decided to try again with the new incoming class, and are currently both doing well/passing all their classes. The other person dropped out and decided PTA school would be a better fit. Come graduation time, 34/37 will graduate on time, but the overall graduation rate from my class will be 36/37, so not too shabby.

 

[ktachiba]

My school has a very high graduation rate (including those who are held back), and that is also something to take into consideration. I think that in relation to graduation rates, schools don't want their students to fail out because it reflects their program poorly, and they lose money. So if a school has a low graduation rate, while there are other factors to take into consideration, it could mean a variety of things (i.e. lower tolerance for poorer performing students, or that they don't properly prepare their students, etc.) I think my school has something like a 97-8% graduation rate, but I think that's also because my program did a good job at giving students a second chance while maintaining a high standard (i.e. in order to pass a class/test, must get at least an 80%. If you don't pass a class, you have to repeat it the following year with the class that is a year below you. If you don't pass another class, then you're kicked out from the program.)

To address the attrition rate, my class started out with 37 people, but 3 were held back due to poor academics. 2 decided to try again with the new incoming class, and are currently both doing well/passing all their classes. The other person dropped out and decided PTA school would be a better fit. Come graduation time, 34/37 will graduate on time, but the overall graduation rate from my class will be 36/37, so not too shabby.

Nice! Which school is this if you don't mind me asking?

 

[DesertPT]

If schools are only gradating 36 students every year and the ultimate pass rate is 99%, that's no better than a school like mine that's graduating >150 students and has a ultimate pass rate of 97%

I guess I'm missing the logic here...if graduating PT students are assumed to be distributed randomly among all the PT schools (ie. in your example we assume class size is not correlated with student academic ability), and we also assume that educational quality doesn't vary with class size, then why should we expect the number of students per capita who fail to become licensed to vary with class size?

 

[NewTestament]

The more students who take the test, the more students who are going to fail. It's probability. But if a school only accepts 36 of the brightest students once a year, then we would expect the ultimate pass rate to be near 100%

 

[DesertPT]

The more students who take the test, the more students who are going to fail. It's probability. But if a school only accepts 36 of the brightest students once a year, then we would expect the ultimate pass rate to be near 100%

Right. I was assuming you were comparing the class sizes all things being equal...but if the smaller classes are more likely to have brighter students on average than you would be right.

 

[imallama]

Nice! Which school is this if you don't mind me asking?

University of the pacific, in Stockton.

And in terms of pass rate for the boards, I forgot to mention that the class above me had a 100% pass rate while my class is around 90-95%, which falls into the overall average I was told as a prospective student about passing the boards (they had a 99% eventual pass rate). As someone said earlier, I think the schools overall pass rate is just as important as the overall pass rate.