NMDA Journal Fall 2020

nmdental.org 13 Perhaps no issue has divided the dental profession more strongly over time than the subject of licensing. It is a passionate disagreement with all sides convinced of their righteousness and other’s wrongness. This is difficult for outside observers to understand because there is a surprising amount of agreement on the goals making it appear that the argument is largely over style, but that is an oversimplification. The factions view this issue as existential at its core. There are essentially four issues that drive this debate: 1. Competency vs. Competency It is hard to believe that the definition of this word could be at the heart of the controversy, but in many ways, it is key. Educators tend to use this word to refer to the skills required to practice. They design curriculums to develop core competencies and count demonstration of these competencies as the success of their educational process. Examiners (this term applies to licensing authorities rather than test administrators) look at competency as a person’s overall fitness to practice and provide quality care. Although the individual competencies are essential, “com- petency” is more than the sum of its parts. Educators will claim that you can’t test for that, while examiners will say that it is their job to judge the intangibles and that they must do it all the time in the disciplinary process. They would argue that the artificial duress created by the exam- ination creates a “test” of a person’s true competency to practice under pressure. 2. Fairness Arguably, no one wants the examination process to be unfair, but there are undoubtedly aspects of the traditional live patient exams that will be perceived as “unfair.” Suc- cess or failure hinges on many factors that are outside the continues on page 14  LICENSE TO DISAGREE