EPPP and Jurisprudence Exams - Request for Remote Testing due to Covid-19 Petition

[QueenBee13]

Clinicians are struggling to obtain test dates, continue to pay for study subscriptions and materials, timing out due to reduced testing availability due to Covid-19. Some individuals may struggle to even take the test if they have to wear a mask consistently for 4 hours. Whether you are licensed or trying to obtain your license, please support your fellow clinicians.

Thank you

Allow remote testing for EPPP and jurisprudence exams for psychology licensure

We, the undersigned call on The Association of State and Provincial Psychology Board and the American Psychological Association to move the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP) testing and State Board testing to remote testing online access. The current pandemic has lead to...

sign.moveon.org

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[WisNeuro]

What are the proposed measures to ensure there is no cheating going on during remote administration?

 

[QueenBee13]

There are sites that offer online proctoring, also there are tests that require you to input identifying information at different intervals. I am open to any and all feedback. Seeing a number of other professions move towards remote testing would suggest it is possible.

 

[WisNeuro]

I'm open to the concept, just wouldn't support it until I know the specifics of maintaining integrity and validity of test taker. The 30 minute verification issue is too easy to sidestep as a lone measure.

 

[QueenBee13]

I hear you and completely agree. I haven't placed any firm requirements on what remote testing would look like as that is beyond my scope of expertise. More so from the standpoint of asking the boards to look into this as an option as the delay for getting a test date is extremely problematic. In addition, having to wear a mask for 4 hours is not optimal for test taking.

 

[WisNeuro]

In addition, having to wear a mask for 4 hours is not optimal for test taking.

Why? Most of us still working in hospitals wear them for 8+ hours a day with no difficulty. I can imagine there are a certain number of rare circumstances in which it'd be a problem medically, but that would not be the case for a vast majority of test takers.

 

[QueenBee13]

Why? Most of us still working in hospitals wear them for 8+ hours a day with no difficulty. I can imagine there are a certain number of rare circumstances in which it'd be a problem medically, but that would not be the case for a vast majority of test takers.

I can use myself as one example, I wear the N95 masks at work as they are safer with regards to stopping potential viruses. However, I am also pregnant and in my first trimester and vulnerable to teratogens. I personally do not feel comfortable breathing in CO2 for 4 hours and potentially putting my child at risk. Even with taking breaks to remove the mask the clock doesn't stop running. Thus for me at the moment I'm sheltering in place at home because I don't want to take any risks.

Other individuals have reached out to me with respiratory concerns stating that they feel like they are suffocating when they are wearing a mask. I believe some people have asked to be in a testing room by themselves so they do not have to wear a mask but have not been successful.

I think everyone's main concern about this test will be different, for some it's having to wear a mask, for others it's that they might lose their jobs because they can't sit the exam in time, for other clinicians they are having to continue to pay for test taking subscriptions with no idea when they can take the test (I heard in Canada they have to pay quite a bit more because of the exchange rate). For some clinicians, none of these things will matter and they are in a position to wait for a test date.

 

[WisNeuro]

An N95 is not necessary with proper distancing guidelines when a cloth or surgical mask would suffice with other disinfecting procedures in place. Furthermore, I am not aware of any empirical evidence that n95 masks cause any degree of significant of hypoxia in individuals who do not have a severe respiratory disease that is sensitive to small changes in airflow, and even that is likely due to increased effort in respiration than due to CO2 content. Pretty much all of the junk you see about hazards of wearing masks is simply conspiracy theory nonsense thrown out for political reasons. If you have high quality peer-reviewed evidence to the contrary, I'm willing to read it. But, I am not convinced at the moment.

 

[bookwormpsych]

An N95 is not necessary with proper distancing guidelines when a cloth or surgical mask would suffice with other disinfecting procedures in place. Furthermore, I am not aware of any empirical evidence that n95 masks cause any degree of significant of hypoxia in individuals who do not have a severe respiratory disease that is sensitive to small changes in airflow, and even that is likely due to increased effort in respiration than due to CO2 content. Pretty much all of the junk you see about hazards of wearing masks is simply conspiracy theory nonsense thrown out for political reasons. If you have high quality peer-reviewed evidence to the contrary, I'm willing to read it. But, I am not convinced at the moment.

I have not seen any peer-reviewed journals about the idea of hypoxia or re-breathing CO2 in. However, I have seen a nurse who attempted to do a little experiment about this idea. She basically tested her oxygen levels without mask, then after wearing a surgical mask for 1 hour (then took an hour w/o mask in between each condition), then after wearing an N95 mask, then after a surgical mask+N95 mask (which, supposedly, many health professionals use the combination?). Anyway, she found that heart rate, as well as oxygen levels, were all within the normal ranges without differences between all conditions. Again, not a peer-reviewed journal article, just some nurse trying stuff out to help with this ideation. I'm not entirely sure how great/accurate this is, but I thought it was interesting to see someone try an idea.

 

[WisNeuro]

I have not seen any peer-reviewed journals about the idea of hypoxia or re-breathing CO2 in. However, I have seen a nurse who attempted to do a little experiment about this idea. She basically tested her oxygen levels without mask, then after wearing a surgical mask for 1 hour (then took an hour w/o mask in between each condition), then after wearing an N95 mask, then after a surgical mask+N95 mask (which, supposedly, many health professionals use the combination?). Anyway, she found that heart rate, as well as oxygen levels, were all within the normal ranges without differences between all conditions. Again, not a peer-reviewed journal article, just some nurse trying stuff out to help with this ideation. I'm not entirely sure how great/accurate this is, but I thought it was interesting to see someone try an idea.

There are actually peer-reviewed studies about this for people interested. The hypoxia thing is simply ill-informed fear mongering. Just another plug for people doing some research when they see junk posted on facebook, twitter, or whatever the hell you kids use these days

 

[futureapppsy2]

There are actually peer-reviewed studies about this for people interested. The hypoxia thing is simply ill-informed fear mongering. Just another plug for people doing some research when they see junk posted on facebook, twitter, or whatever the hell you kids use these days

Yeppp. Plus, we would have massive rates of hypoxia in surgical staff if this had any grounding in reality.

 

[WisNeuro]

Yeppp. Plus, we would have massive rates of hypoxia in surgical staff if this had any grounding in reality.

Pretty much, especially cardiothoracic and neurosurg where the surgeries are super long. Unfortunately these stupid mask myths persist, one reason why *****s refuse to wear then in public. Looking at you, middle-aged white dudes.

 

[bookwormpsych]

There are actually peer-reviewed studies about this for people interested. The hypoxia thing is simply ill-informed fear mongering. Just another plug for people doing some research when they see junk posted on facebook, twitter, or whatever the hell you kids use these days

Oh, I don't doubt that there are. I meant that I personally have not looked for or at the articles. Because like you said, it is just fear mongering. Or an excuse for people to not have to wear masks in public. I took the EPPP about two weeks ago and had to wear a mask the entire time. The only thing it did for me was 1) make my face hot from my breath (I did a lot of deep breaths to get through it lol) and 2) fog my dang glasses up from time to time. I work in a state hospital so wearing a mask is a must for me 8 hours a day as well.

 

[WisNeuro]

Oh, I don't doubt that there are. I meant that I personally have not looked for or at the articles. Because like you said, it is just fear mongering. Or an excuse for people to not have to wear masks in public. I took the EPPP about two weeks ago and had to wear a mask the entire time. The only thing it did for me was 1) make my face hot from my breath (I did a lot of deep breaths to get through it lol) and 2) fog my dang glasses up from time to time. I work in a state hospital so wearing a mask is a must for me 8 hours a day as well.

So, mildly uncomfortable, but you managed to get through the test without passing out?

 

[bookwormpsych]

So, mildly uncomfortable, but you managed to get through the test without passing out?

Haha, I did! I think I might have been close to passing out at the end, but that was the EPPP's fault and wanting to leave the room so badly!

Clinicians are struggling to obtain test dates, continue to pay for study subscriptions and materials, timing out due to reduced testing availability due to Covid-19. Some individuals may struggle to even take the test if they have to wear a mask consistently for 4 hours. Whether you are licensed or trying to obtain your license, please support your fellow clinicians.

Thank you

Allow remote testing for EPPP and jurisprudence exams for psychology licensure

We, the undersigned call on The Association of State and Provincial Psychology Board and the American Psychological Association to move the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP) testing and State Board testing to remote testing online access. The current pandemic has lead to...

sign.moveon.org

Regarding the OP: I know that it is frustrating having difficulty to obtain test dates. Mine was cancelled in April and the earliest next date I could land was June. However, as WisNeuro pointed out, until there is an appropriate measure in place to maintain the validity of the test, many clinicians might be at odds with this idea and may not be okay with pushing this forward to the boards for that reason. And finding the appropriate measures may take a good chunk of time on it's own.

The masks, yeah it was annoying, but it didn't affect my actual test taking. Now, that may not be the same for everyone obviously. It might be bothersome to some, but you can always step out for a restroom break/breather, gather your thoughts, etc. I know the test time keeps running, but many people take scheduled breaks every X amount of items anyway.

I'm not opposed to the idea, but I'm also not for the idea until measures, as mentioned above, were found to enforce this.

 

[QueenBee13]

I understand your points and I am thankful for the input. I'm not advocating that this be rolled out without further exploration or research. I am not a professional in test taking remotely and I am open to people suggesting professionals or bodies whom this is their area of expertise. However, I am merely proposing this as a conversation that should at least be had, as other professions seem willing to consider it.

I am fortunate enough to not be in a time crunch with obtaining my licensure and after my exam was cancelled in April, I was able to secure a space in September. When at work, I personally wear a mask because I have to (I work in a prison)...I don't like it as I find it suffocating (especially in 100+ degree heat) and patients struggle to hear me and me them but I do it to stay safe.

I don't anticipate this happening in the next month or so if at all, but as a profession I do think it's important that these discussions are had. I don't have the solution, but I am trying to find one that works for everyone.

 

[WisNeuro]

This seems like a solution in search of a problem at the moment. Particularly as state boards, which we speak to regularly, have generally been lenient in variances due to the pandemic.

I'm fine if there is an actual problem, but I can't condone signing on to a statement that includes blatant falsehoods and conspiracy theories in an attempt to make a point.

" Wearing a mask can limit the amount of oxygen causing lightheadedness, feeling faint, smothered, or intaking more carbon dioxide."

I'd need to see numbers that this is a continuing problem, static or not improving, rather than a one time delay. And two, teh mission statement needs to not read like an infowars article.

 

[QueenBee13]

This seems like a solution in search of a problem at the moment. Particularly as state boards, which we speak to regularly, have generally been lenient in variances due to the pandemic.

I'm fine if there is an actual problem, but I can't condone signing on to a statement that includes blatant falsehoods and conspiracy theories in an attempt to make a point.

" Wearing a mask can limit the amount of oxygen causing lightheadedness, feeling faint, smothered, or intaking more carbon dioxide."

I'd need to see numbers that this is a continuing problem, static or not improving, rather than a one time delay. And two, teh mission statement needs to not read like an infowars article.

When you say "we speak to regularly" are these unlicensed individuals speaking to the boards or licensed individuals? I have had numerous people contact me stating that this has been an issue for them. Some people have been trying to contact their board since March with no avail. If you have suggestions on how these people can successfully get through to their boards, I would be happy to pass that on.


With regards to your attack that the mission statement reads like an infowars article...I'm not entirely sure what that is so I cannot comment. You do not have to sign it and I am not responding in the hopes that I can steer you one way or another. This was started in good faith after seeing numerous other professional entities make changes due to Covid-19. I accept and acknowledge your critique, albeit some of it did come across as sarcastic and snarky (I'm a Brit, I can take it).

As you know, with any research or new ventures data collection takes time. In addition, having to deal with Covid-19 is new for many individuals and there is a lot of misinformation flying around and has been since day one (albeit I do not believe feeling smothered, faint or lightheaded is a falsehood). But it sounds like, what you are saying is if only 500 or less people are having an issue then it sucks to be them? This may be a one time delay...but how long is that delay going to last for? At this point, nobody knows...or if they do, no one is sharing that information. This is a problem for a number of individuals, if you do not agree or you think individuals are making mountains out of mole hills that is absolutely your opinion to have. Everyone's experience of this pandemic will be different, some will have found it a cake walk...others not so much.

There seems to be a resounding want/need to slow down matriculation in our field. If the Bar, is willing to not only consider it but allow it for their professionals (with little delay), why is the mere discussion being met with such hostility. I don't think anyone is looking for a free or easy pass with this test.

That is all I am going to say on the matter. If anyone has suggestions that can be passed on to other unlicensed individuals who are struggling to get licensed, I would be happy to pass that information on in the mean time.

 

[WisNeuro]

When you say "we speak to regularly" are these unlicensed individuals speaking to the boards or licensed individuals? I have had numerous people contact me stating that this has been an issue for them. Some people have been trying to contact their board since March with no avail. If you have suggestions on how these people can successfully get through to their boards, I would be happy to pass that on.

We as in our state association in discussions with other state associations and boards of psychology. Most boards have phone number and e-mail addresses. We haven't heard any consistent concerns about not being able to reach them within more than 5 business days for the most part. Some boards respond better to one form or another, and some are limiting time in office, so e-mail seems to be better these days.

As you know, with any research or new ventures data collection takes time. In addition, having to deal with Covid-19 is new for many individuals and there is a lot of misinformation flying around and has been since day one (albeit I do not believe feeling smothered, faint or lightheaded is a falsehood). But it sounds like, what you are saying is if only 500 or less people are having an issue then it sucks to be them? This may be a one time delay...but how long is that delay going to last for? At this point, nobody knows...or if they do, no one is sharing that information. This is a problem for a number of individuals, if you do not agree or you think individuals are making mountains out of mole hills that is absolutely your opinion to have. Everyone's experience of this pandemic will be different, some will have found it a cake walk...others not so much.

The idea that hypoxia is a concern is a falsehood. You write that limiting the amount of oxygen causes those things. That is incorrect. Someone's interoceptive experience can cause anxiety, which can cause those things, but it is not lack of oxygen. That is a dangerous, and misleading scare tactic that is downright irresponsible given the current climate.

 

[QueenBee13]

We as in our state association in discussions with other state associations and boards of psychology. Most boards have phone number and e-mail addresses. We haven't heard any consistent concerns about not being able to reach them within more than 5 business days for the most part. Some boards respond better to one form or another, and some are limiting time in office, so e-mail seems to be better these days.



The idea that hypoxia is a concern is a falsehood. You write that limiting the amount of oxygen causes those things. That is incorrect. Someone's interoceptive experience can cause anxiety, which can cause those things, but it is not lack of oxygen. That is a dangerous, and misleading scare tactic that is downright irresponsible given the current climate.

From what I have heard, people have tried calling and emailing with no luck.

The wording has been changed to acknowledge that some individuals have complained of feeling smothered while wearing a mask. This was by no means used (or intended) as a scare tactic and I apologize if that's what you believe the intent was.

 

[WisNeuro]

I can use myself as one example, I wear the N95 masks at work as they are safer with regards to stopping potential viruses. However, I am also pregnant and in my first trimester and vulnerable to teratogens. I personally do not feel comfortable breathing in CO2 for 4 hours and potentially putting my child at risk. Even with taking breaks to remove the mask the clock doesn't stop running. Thus for me at the moment I'm sheltering in place at home because I don't want to take any risks.

It isn't simply what I believe, from what you have posted, that was the intent. Thank you for changing the wording. This is an issue that has directly lead to many of the outbreaks that we are seeing, and likely costing many thousands of lives. By all means, advocate for a position. But, use data when possible, and avoid perpetuating myths, particularly when lives are at stake. I've already had to cross far too many names off of my evaluation wait list this year, I'm not looking forward to crossing more off because people keep spreading lies about wearing masks.

 

[Jxz]

Clinicians are struggling to obtain test dates, continue to pay for study subscriptions and materials, timing out due to reduced testing availability due to Covid-19. Some individuals may struggle to even take the test if they have to wear a mask consistently for 4 hours. Whether you are licensed or trying to obtain your license, please support your fellow clinicians.

Thank you

Allow remote testing for EPPP and jurisprudence exams for psychology licensure

We, the undersigned call on The Association of State and Provincial Psychology Board and the American Psychological Association to move the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP) testing and State Board testing to remote testing online access. The current pandemic has lead to...

sign.moveon.org

EPPP is a different thing. But for jurisprudence it is logical to do this.

The NJ Jurisprudence exam, for example, as soon as you walk in, they give you a copy of all the laws and regs along with the exam. There's no reason that you can't just answer those 20 T/F questions at home since it's essentially open-book anyway. I think they were considering an online option when it first was designed but never followed up on it.

I believe that the Texas jurisprudence is given online (although I haven't taken it, don't know exactly).

NY doesn't even have a jurisprudence exam.

 

[cara susanna]

EPPP is a different thing. But for jurisprudence it is logical to do this.

The NJ Jurisprudence exam, for example, as soon as you walk in, they give you a copy of all the laws and regs along with the exam. There's no reason that you can't just answer those 20 T/F questions at home since it's essentially open-book anyway. I think they were considering an online option when it first was designed but never followed up on it.

I believe that the Texas jurisprudence is given online (although I haven't taken it, don't know exactly).

NY doesn't even have a jurisprudence exam.

Wisconsin's is online as well.

 

[QueenBee13]

EPPP is a different thing. But for jurisprudence it is logical to do this.

The NJ Jurisprudence exam, for example, as soon as you walk in, they give you a copy of all the laws and regs along with the exam. There's no reason that you can't just answer those 20 T/F questions at home since it's essentially open-book anyway. I think they were considering an online option when it first was designed but never followed up on it.

I believe that the Texas jurisprudence is given online (although I haven't taken it, don't know exactly).

NY doesn't even have a jurisprudence exam.

Oh wow. Yes the Texas jurisprudence exam is online and they give you two weeks to complete it. I have friends in other states who only needed to sit the EPPP to be licensed.

So with the jurisprudence exam, definitely an easy fix and some people don't pass the remote exams so it's not to say that because it's remote everyone will cheat and pass.

 

[foreverbull]

I would definitely say that some state boards are terrible at responding, especially if you are not yet in the licensure application phase or post-licensed. I contacted my state’s board several times to ask questions long before the licensure process and just never got any responses to calls or emails—ever. I only managed to get through when I was IN the licensure process and was assigned a person who was in charge of my file to review my application materials. Anyone trying to contact my state board to ask questions before you get to that stage? Good luck. Not sure how many states are like this, but I wouldn’t be surprised to hear at least a few others are the same way.

 

[cara susanna]

I would definitely say that some state boards are terrible at responding, especially if you are not yet in the licensure application phase or post-licensed. I contacted my state’s board several times to ask questions long before the licensure process and just never got any responses to calls or emails—ever. I only managed to get through when I was IN the licensure process and was assigned a person who was in charge of my file to review my application materials. Anyone trying to contact my state board to ask questions before you get to that stage? Good luck. Not sure how many states are like this, but I wouldn’t be surprised to hear at least a few others are the same way.

Lol, I'm in the process of getting licensed in another state and it's been on average 1-2 months before the board responds to my questions or submissions.

 

[QueenBee13]

I would definitely say that some state boards are terrible at responding, especially if you are not yet in the licensure application phase or post-licensed. I contacted my state’s board several times to ask questions long before the licensure process and just never got any responses to calls or emails—ever. I only managed to get through when I was IN the licensure process and was assigned a person who was in charge of my file to review my application materials. Anyone trying to contact my state board to ask questions before you get to that stage? Good luck. Not sure how many states are like this, but I wouldn’t be surprised to hear at least a few others are the same way.

One colleague just contacted me to let me know that she's been trying to contact the California Board since March and they responded to her today stating that due to delays and to allow at least 3 weeks for a response...she's requesting an extension.

Wow 1-2 months, do you mind me asking which state that is?

 

[cara susanna]

One colleague just contacted me to let me know that she's been trying to contact the California Board since March and they responded to her today stating that due to delays and to allow at least 3 weeks for a response...she's requesting an extension.

Wow 1-2 months, do you mind me asking which state that is?

I'll PM you.

 

[dr.rayne]

Has anyone in California tried pursuing this with the Board? I am currently in conversation with someone in the examination coordination department. I feel without vocal advocacy from more of us this won't get very far. Email exchange thus far:

Update: they are going tor raise this issue at the upcoming board meeting on Feb 19

Me: Given the severity of COVID in Southern California, I am greatly concerned about being required to appear in person to take the CPLEE. I took the EPPP in November and was very uncomfortable with the amount of people I had to share a small room with for three hours. Is the Board considering online, monitored administration? It is my understanding those taking the bar have this option in some states and this should be considered, especially for an exam such as the CPLEE. At a time like this we need psychologists more than ever, yet many of us are reluctant to put our safety at risk for these exams.

BOP: The CPLEE, unfortunately, is not available for remote access. It is such for high stake exams. Concern for exam security, exam monitoring, use of a personal computer etc. are just some of the major concerns the Department has. PSI exam sites have implemented safety measures for PSI staff and exam candidates. Please visit their website at Important Notice: Update concerning COVID-19 (Novel Coronavirus) | PSI Online . If the measures are still not acceptable to you, you always have the option to postpone your exam; just be mindful of your eligibility period. If your eligibility is about to expire you can easily reapply for a new exam eligibility by submitting a new application.

Me: Has it been brought to the Board’s attention that the bar exam in California (and many other states) is being administered online? Is that not an equally high-stakes or arguably higher-stakes exam? Surely the CA Supreme Court would not have made this decision if there are not readily available resources for ensuring the security and validity of the exam. I have also learned that the jurisprudence exam in Texas and Wisconsin is being administered online. Can the Board or Department provide the public with more detailed reasons why this not being pursued more seriously in California, where COVID cases are even higher?

There are a lack of positions available for unlicensed clinicians and many of us are left struggling on unemployment, weary to put ourselves in danger by taking the licensing exams. Especially those who are immunocompromised, pregnant, or caring for elderly or young family members. I am concerned about my colleagues and those in desperate need of mental health services at this time.