Nurses nurse early win
By Al S. Mendoza
HERE’S GOOD NEWS to the passers of the recent nursing board exams, especially to those who did not benefit from the leaked test questions. On August 15, Tuesday, 400 nursing deans will dialogue with the Professional Regulatory Commission (PRC) headed by Leonor Tripon-Rosero. In the gathering, Rosero will attempt to enlighten the deans on the system used by the PRC in holding the last exams.
“Hopefully, they will understand our position,” Rosero said.
The meat of the Tuesday dialogue is Rosero’s mission to explain how the PRC had computed the grades of the examinees to nullify the effect of any leakage, including the formula the PRC had adopted in arriving at the final grades.
Rosero also said the dialogue will mostly likely decide whether the oath-taking for the passers set for August 22, which was held in abeyance pending the outcome of leakage investigations, would push through or not.
As I said here last week, passers who knowingly benefited from the leakage will not lose that much if the exam got nullified. It is the examinees who passed with a clear conscience who will suffer the most.
But the genuine passers have something to rejoice about, at least for now: Rosero said she was not inclined to order a retake of the last nursing exams, which produced about 17,000 new nurses from 42,000 examinees, led no less by Mangaldan’s Gringo San Diego (the top finisher) of the University of Pangasinan, and three distinguished aspirants from the Lyceum Northwestern University who were in the Top 10.
“If you passed the exam, would you like to retake it again? It is unfair to those who did not benefit from the leakage,” Rosero said.
As I said here last week, conscience is the last repository of truth.
One who did not benefit from the leakage and passed the exam can always walk chin up, head unbowed.
One who passed but who knowingly knew he/she had done so because he/she had benefited from the leakage, well, the victory is somewhat tainted. But then, on second thought, such an examinee must not be totally blamed, ostracized even.
Look, how sure was an examinee the leaked questions he/she got were for real – even if, say, he/she bought the said questionnaires?
You got them, all right, then you proceeded with a clear conscience, with a pure heart, I think you’re fine. If it turns out you actually got genuine leaked questions, thank your stars. You gambled. You won. At times, indiscretion is the mother of desperation.
I’m not saying the presence of leaked questions is fine. No. Let’s punish its authors (my heart still goes though to Anesia Dionisio and Virginia Madeja, the alleged culprits. Why they did it, I’d like to know. Money maybe? ). I pity them but not necessarily the leakage’s recipients. Recipients were merely latching on to what their stars might bring them. Luck, that is. Besides, Rosero has assured us the questioned questions have been effectively removed from the test papers before they gave the final grades of the examinees – thus, the hue of genuine grades is there for us to appreciate.
So my verdict is, let’s proceed with the oath-taking on August 22.
In such a weird situation like the case at hand, it’s better to make everybody happy than to make everybody sorry.