Mark
Permit a response as a non-educationalist in the undergraduate sense,
but one who takes students through postgraduate learning to fellowship.
All the BSc courses are now in the university sector but the qualities
vary. One, Southampton, is in the prestigious Russell group with high
entry requirements and high academic standards. Some excel at
biomechanics, some at understanding diagnosis and some at providing
treatment for pain relief.
I have always thought the qualities of the training relate to the
strengths of the staff but that might be thought to be a superficial
analysis. By the way the same inequalities have been demonstrated in the
US and Australia. There is no doubt that in the UK some students arrive
with the experience to deliver a high quality reliable ankle block and
some have only ever given a single la toe injection.
Now there may be nothing wrong with these differences, as long as the
course has some strengths, you can only cram s o much in three years. As
for the unregulated sector I am not able to comment save that any
evaluation I have seen equates them to less than six months of a full
time course.
You mention debt and fees. You will have seen that the govt has made
clear that all the NHS professions will be free of the new charges for
courses, so that only personal costs will figure in the student debt.
This concession was inevitable as else the NHS entry salaries would have
to be greatly enhanced. We do not have any published intention to make
students who are trained at no fee commit to NHS employment, but such a
change would not be a surprise, c/f medical students who provide cheap
labour by being obliged to work for the NHS for at least 1 year to gain
registration.
Now such a postgraduate, pre-registration would be unpopular because it
would also be seen as a model for cheap labour, but that problem aside I
think such a move would improve the quality of the new registrant.
Whilst they may well be better equipped than you and I in terms of
general medical knowledge and research methods they are often less well
experienced in clinical practice. I think they would benefit from a
properly structured supervised placement year to achieve experience
goals and development. (How do you like the educational jargon?) The
proper structure for the supervised practice would overcome the cheap
labour jibe.
Anyone any thoughts??
Kind Regards
Ralph Graham
Consultant Podiatrist
Witham, Essex, U.K.
-----Original Message-----
From: A group for the academic discussion of current issues in podiatry
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mark Russell
Sent: 10 March 2004 08:09
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Podiatry Education
In the middle of all this excitement in the current debate, I wonder if
I may throw another bone in for discussion? Can I poll opinion over
podiatry education in the UK.
“What do contributors think of the present set-up and how would they
propose changes for the better?”
I am increasingly concerned regarding the plight of new entrants into
the professional community as well as those still working their way
through the undergraduate program at our schools and colleges. For one
thing, we are beginning to see the real impact that student debt
exercises on the younger generation. I read tonight that there has been
a marked rise in bankruptcies for the under 25’s during the last four
years. I daresay that trend will continue. We are fast approaching the
time when the debt levels on graduation could be as much as £20-£30K –
which makes the paltry £500 overdraft I had seem quite insignificant
(and it still took me 10 years to repay it!).
Opportunities in the clinical sphere are not quite what they used to be.
Even if a new graduate gains employment with the NHS – the traditional
playground where we hone our skills – long-term career prospects are
poor, the salaries unattractive, especially with the cost of housing and
tax & etc. Is state run podiatry really that attractive to the six-form
student anymore?
In private practice it’s difficult as well. Sure there are more
opportunities, but that route is not so certain and good regular income
can take years to build up. That’s not considering the impact the HPC
legislation had to the existing viability of the marketplace (or on the
morale of the podiatry students for that matter).
Podiatry education appears to be suffering too. The funding crisis at FE
Colleges is just as bad as the one in the NHS. Podiatry comes far down
the line just as it does in health. Then there are the independent
schools, who, unless we bring them into the mainstream community, will
seek to undermine the ethos of closure and protection of title by
training Foot Health Consultants instead. What impact then on the
recruitment drive in future years?
Clearly there is a need for an educational programme which targets
different grades of clinician. Instead of the one size fits all
approach, why not a Diploma in Podology (for assistants, technicians,
orthotists & etc – a generic course run by podiatry schools and offered
to other disciplines as well) and a four year degree course for
specialist diagnostic clinicians perhaps with assisted entry from the
Diploma.
Can I also ask opinion regarding structure of the educational community
itself? We have some 13 or 14 schools teaching the BSc programme at
present in polytechnics and 2nd grade universities (no offence meant). I
addition, there are three or four schools in the independent sector
which are unregulated and free from inspection. Clearly this is
unsatisfactory. Can such fragmentation really be practicable in a modern
age? Wouldn’t four or five podiatry colleges be better, with higher
yearly intakes – working alongside ‘centres of excellence’ in podiatric
care? Colleges that provide a raft of programmes both at undergraduate
and postgraduate level.
I raise this subject because of a recent conversation with a government
minister, who floated the idea of regional centres of excellence in gait
and its associated disorders. This was a subject that was discussed two
years ago on another forum, and an outline proposal was raised with a
DoH official at the time. If the government are in the market for some
‘social trophies’ - the way Labour administrations sometimes are – then
could a case be submitted that might bring together the research and
development fields and the whole educational apparatus into some form of
complementary partnership? With that kind of set-up, the colleges could
be more attractive to corporate support through the various trade bodies
something more and more premier division universities are taking
advantage off. Just some thoughts but I’d be interested in some other
views.
Sincerely
Mark Russell
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was distributed by the Podiatry JISCmail list server
All opinions and assertions contained in this message are those of the
original author. The listowner(s) and the JISCmail service take no
responsibility for the content.
to leave the Podiatry email list send a message containing the text
leave podiatry to [log in to unmask]
Please visit http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk for any further information
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was distributed by the Podiatry JISCmail list server
All opinions and assertions contained in this message are those of
the original author. The listowner(s) and the JISCmail service take
no responsibility for the content.
to leave the Podiatry email list send a message containing the text
leave podiatry
to [log in to unmask]
Please visit http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk for any further information
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|