• "We asked in particular that changes be made such that all candidates can know what constitutes adequate answers to oral examination questions. Further more, when people fail the exam, they should also receive detailed information about why they were failed."

 In another article written by Risa Foster in the NASW CA News April 1995 edition the following issues were raised:

• "hold the exam in other than hotel rooms and increase the time to review the contents of the vignettes from 5 minutes to 10 minutes."

• "77.1 percent of respondents believed they passed the exam after exiting; 22.9 percent felt they failed; the actual pass rate was 37.3 percent which means there is an enormous disparity between the candidates’ perceptions of their success and the reality. During the meeting the board seemed somewhat more reluctant to look further at the issue of the low pass rate for this exam."

• "The board did seem interested in "having a psychometrist from the American Association of State Social Work Boards look at the oral exam and give them his input".

 What progress has NASW made over the past six years in getting the BBSE to "fix" the oral exam? Here are the results of six years of hard work by NASW and "cooperation" from the BBSE:

• The exam continues to be held in hotel rooms. However, this picture is brighter than it first appears because an examinee no longer has to sit on the bed during the oral examination, they are now able to sit at a small table in a hotel room just a few feet away from a bed while they are "examined" by two other "social workers".

• Applicants have been allowed a full two minutes more to review their vignette ( I am sure this will make all the difference in the world).

• The pass rate for the oral remains the same and examinees remain baffled by their inability to pass this exam.

• A psychometrist from the AASSWB NEVER reviewed the oral examination .

• Requests for an open and closed forum to review the exam were refused by the BBSE.

• The oral exam continues to be a SUBJECTIVE exam without any "correct" answers. To date when applicants fail the exam they still do not receive any individualized information about why they failed. Applicants receive one single numerical score for each content area. The numerical score will correspond with a table that consists of generic standard responses regarding whether or not the response is determined to be deficient. Neither the numerical score nor the table will provide applicants with any individualized information about why their response was determined deficient or which of the different associated knowledges was not covered sufficiently.

Jane Totman, LCSW and former oral examiner – "I was disgusted with the process...It is not possible to give a fair exam."

Teresa DeCresenzo, LCSW and former oral examiner and chair of the board – She describes the oral as a "fatally flawed personality contest."

"As for the exam’s relationship to actual psychotherapy, critics said experience and deliberation were essential to sound treatment, while the instant analyses and snap judgments required on the oral could lead to malpractice in a real clinical setting."