Have FPGEE® will iBT TOEFL® next...

So, I sat back and enjoyed the moment, having passed the first hurdle to becoming an American pharmacist. I had passed the FPGEE®. I knew what I had to do next, which was to take and pass the required proof of English reading, listening and writing - called the iBT-TOEFL® test. From the paperwork the NABP® posted out with their original information it was quite clear that this test was a basic requirement for ALL non-US pharmacists, even if they were from an English speaking country. The NABP® would not send out their FPGEC® certificate unless they had received the TOEFL® result, which is sent direct from TOEFL® to NABP® using code 9103 whilst signing up for the TOEFL®. I should add this number may change in the future so please don't take my word for it that it is the correct or current number. It was when I took the test though! I didn't think I needed to revise for the test, or even look up on the internet what it entailed. I am English aren't I! What a mistake. I was at the test centre as requested 30 minutes before the start time of 12 noon. I went in and met a friendly assortment of people who all had fairly strong foreign accents. I felt a bit embarrassed being there, but on the other hand I felt confidant I would pass. We filled out a waiver, similar to the one we signed at the FPGEE® saying we would not, on pain of death and eternal damnation ever reveal what goes on behind the secretive closed doors of the iBT-TOEFL®. Signed and dated we were lead to another room where we had our various identifications confirmed. I had my passport in hand. And thence to the exam room (after one last run to the loo!). I should add at this point that I believed for some reason, the exam lasted one and a half hours. At this point I was advised it lasted between four and five hours. And I was hungry. I take my seat and put on a set of head-phones. There is a voice test to check the sound level and then another waiver and off we go. I shant go in to the specifics of the exam of course, but the first two hours involved a combination of listening through the head-phones, reading and watching things on the console, and then answering multiple choice questions. It was all fairly easy although it required focus. If you lost concentration you could easily forget something important. I remained focused! After 2 hours the computer allowed you a 10 minute break. I went to the loo and got ready for round two. Speaking. This was a little embarassing, as us Brits are not so keen to talk into microphones in a room full of strangers, but I braved it for the greater good. After another sound check I was asked to speak for a minute on a particular subject. It's not that easy speaking about something for a whole minute. I was talking nonsense by the end I am sure. I should have looked in to the format of this test a bit more! Having now become familiar with the process the next verbal section was much better. I made notes, wrote a bit about what I was to say, and spoke slowly and clearly until the time ran out. Better! I could hear the guy two seats down from me do his spoken section a little later. He had said it was his weakness. He was right. All he said was errrrrr and ummmmm and hesitated a lot, and he was very, errr, accented. I hope he passed but I wouldn't hold my breath for him. Even my first response was better than his, but I wasn't nervous or stuttering along I suppose. I just spoke. Anyway we eventually come to the written section which was really tough. First they give you something to listen to and something to read and you have to write a precis of the two giving you opinion as to which is correct. Sounds easy, but isn't so straightforward and requires some thinking. I should point out that ALL the examples used in the test were of a scientific nature. The subject matter is of course irrelevant to your use of English, but it did make the test very interesting for me, and perhaps kept me more alert than if the test had been on Music or Art. And finally the test ended with two large freestyle writing sections (typing not hand-written). The last one was slightly longer and slightly more complex. I kept deleting and re-writing sections. I was half-way through re-writing a sentence when the screen was blocked by a box declaring the test had finished! Then there was an opportunity to scrap the result and NOT have it sent to any 3rd parties you may have wanted the result to be forwarded to and that included yourself! So if you absolutely knew you had messed up bigtime I guess you could save yourself from some embarrassment; but as far as I was concerned I just didn't want to accidentally press the wrong button! I was the first to finish from the group and the test had taken me 4 hours and 20 minutes. I was exhausted and starving. Blimey. Once step further along though... Farmacyst ***Addendum*** Thanks go to a kind colleague who has allowed me to pass on the following information: The first time I took the exam my scores were: R=17 L=23 S=27 W=28. After 6 months, I took the exam again and got: R=23 L=27 S=24 W=24. The first time I took the exam, I was surprised with my score in Reading so I emailed them asking if I can request for that Section be re-scored. They said they can only re-score the Speaking & Writing Sections of the exam. So, the second time I sat the exam I requested for a re-scoring of the Speaking Section only, which cost $60, and on the re-score now got a score of 28 in Speaking. The fee was returned as soon as they posted my new score. If I wanted a recount of the Writing Section as well, that would have been another $60! If you honestly think that you did better than the scores you received, then don't hesitate to request for re-scoring. --- So, unlike the FPGEE® which in my opinion is never worth having re-scored, it seems that not only is this VERY worthwhile getting re-scored if you think you did better than the score they gave you, but it also seems that if you are correct and they did underscore you, then they are even kind enough to return your fee! ***