National study of excellence and innovation in physical therapist education: Part 2-a call to reform

Abstract

This perspective shares recommendations that draw from (1) the National Study of Excellence and Innovation in Physical Therapist Education research findings and a conceptual model of excellence in physical therapist education, (2) the Carnegie Foundation's Preparation for the Professions Program (PPP), and (3) research in the learning sciences. The 30 recommendations are linked to the dimensions described in the conceptual model for excellence in physical therapist education: Culture of Excellence, Praxis of Learning, and Organizational Structures and Resources. This perspective proposes a transformative call for reform framed across 3 core categories: (1) creating a culture of excellence, leadership, and partnership, (2) advancing the learning sciences and understanding and enacting the social contract, and (3) implementing organizational imperatives. Similar to the Carnegie studies, this perspective identifies action items (9) that should be initiated immediately in a strategic and systematic way by the major organizational stakeholders in physical therapist education. These recommendations and action items provide a transformative agenda for physical therapist education, and thus the profession, in meeting the changing needs of society through higher levels of excellence. © 2017 American Physical Therapy Association.

Keywords

Author Keywords

Not provided

Index Keywords

learning human procedures Humans Vocational education curriculum qualitative research education United States leadership occupation human experiment professional competence information processing educational model Models, Educational Education, Professional Data collection physiotherapist physiotherapy Physical Therapy Specialty organizational structure mass communication trends Diffusion of Innovation

Author Affiliations

Department of Physical Therapy, Creighton University, Omaha, NE, United States

Department of Physical Therapy, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, United States

Department of Physical Therapy, Samuel Merritt University, Oakland, CA, United States

Physical Therapy Division, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States

Doctoral Program in Physical Therapy, Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant, MI, United States

Funding & Acknowledgements

American Physical Therapy Association, APTA

Funding support for this study was provided by APTA, APTA’s Education Section, APTA’s Orthopaedics Section, and the American Council of Academic Physical Therapy (ACAPT).

References 10 References

1 Worthingham, C. A., T he environment for basic physical therapy education--1965-1966. The academic or theoretical phase., Physical therapy, 48, 9, pp. 935-962, (1968)

2 Phys Ther, (1968)

3 Worthingham, C. A., The clinical environment for basic physical therapy education 1965-1966. II. Staff., Physical therapy, 48, 12, pp. 1353-1382, (1968)

4 Worthingham, C. A., The 1961 and 1965 graduates of the physical therapy schools. I: 1961 graduates. II: 1965 graduates., Physical therapy, 49, 5, pp. 476-479, (1969)

5 Worthingham, C. A., Study of basic physical therapy education. V. Request (prescription or referral) for physical therapy., Physical therapy, 50, 7, pp. 989-1031, (1970)

6 Worthingham, C. A., Study of basic physical therapy education. VI. Findings of the study in relation to trends in patient care and education., Physical therapy, 50, 9, pp. 1315-1332, (1970)

7 Commission on Accreditation for Physical Therapy Education Aggregate Program Data

8 Vision Statement for Physical Therapy Profession

9 American Physical Therapy Association, (2017)

10 American Physical Therapy Association

National study of excellence and innovation in physical therapist education: Part 2-a call to reform

How to Cite