 |
 |
Doug, In response to your response: >Have you ever added up the credits for the BS PT programs and compared those >credits with other BS degrees? I know the credits for my BS degree should >have gotten me very close to a MS degree. That is the "official" credits. >Many of my courses did not offer the full number of credits the course >deserved. This is very true, many entry level Master's programs are simply BS programs with a little extra research added. >Yes. The title society uses for an autonomous health care practitioner is >Doctor. While many of us currently practice autonomously that level of >practice is not recognized readily by society. The DPT should go a long way >to change that perception. I disagree. The title society uses Doctor for is a physician (or academian in the case of PhD). I do not agree with chiros and podiatrists using the designation "Doctor" any more than PT's. Go ask anyone on the street what their perception of the word "doctor" is. They certainly won't tell you "autonomous health care practitioner." The higher designation will only be perceived within our profession, not the public. They will see us still as PT's. >Comparing entry level education over a span of many years is dicey. The same >can be said for MDs, DPM, PharmD, AudD etc. True, but we are talking perceptions here. The perception of any other profession of us is the same, regardless of degree attained. Take the current state of things... does anyone place the designation MPT above BS PT anywhere but within our own ranks? Not in my office. We have one fellow who has been working for over 30 years who could make any NCS or PhD look like a school kid with the extent of his knowledge (myself included). His highest degree? BS PT. >Please explain. My understanding is MDs are awarded a clinical doctoral >degree. They are awarded the title of "doctor" as a physician, but their education level is still accepted as being at a Master's level (except for the few PhD MD programs out there). Your statement brings up an interesting point however... Because we are now awarding entry level DPT's, how is any consumer supposed to determine accurately the expertise of their therapist? Isn't it confusing and misleading to use the same terminology to describe an entry level therapist as one who has gained his DPT through the usual progression (BS then MPT then DPT)? > This statement seems to be a contradiction. The Doctor title is the highest >title in society for a profession. The MD is the biggest and boldest >designation. As it should be. We do not posess the skills and education of physicians, nor should we be claiming to be their equals in the medical world. I think this is the mistake many chiros have made in the past. >Legally and professionally once you enter a profession you have earned the >rights and privileges associated with that profession. No profession, to my >knowledge, has ever advanced its education and status without >"grandfathering" the people in the profession the continued right to >practice. Correct, but we are not "grandfathering" others in the profession to the DPT designation. Thus, there will be a serious rift between DPT's and lesser degree therapists working in the field for an awful long time. If what is being said is true (doubtful) and DPT does raise the perception of the public to us as advanced practitioners, then we risk alienating those with the most experience and clinical expertise. >The level and type of education that quality DPT programs are doing now far >exceeds my BSPT education. It has been my professional responsibility to >continue to stay current with appropriate practice in 2001 and beyond. This may be true, but look at where you are at now compared to when you started years ago. While it is appropriate to continue to make the preliminary education better and better, most talented PT's will still be a step ahead of the academic programs, as their curriculums tend to lag a bit behind current research and developing practice. I will concede, however, that many practicing therapists do not stay current and fall behind the times... in this case perhaps the higher standards of a DPT program may outdistance these therapists, but won't replace their clinical experience. >See above. Degree granting institutions have a responsibility to award >degrees consistant with the credits earned. I don't mean to mislead you, I'm all for DPT and MPT programs as a continuing advancement of base education. It is the entry level programs that I question. >This is not the case. The scope of practice is the same, DPT or not. It does place DPT's in a precarious situation, however. They do not posess the talents or skills of an experienced practitioner, but they carry a title that places them above and beyond all other therapists. >I don't see how a DPT after a BS would be more costly than a MS after a BS. >I have not done an analysis. If you have I'd be interested in what you >found. Advancements in degrees are always an excuse to raise tuition. Just look at the average cost of tuition going from BHS to MPT in the US. In some cases it is 3 or 4 times as much. >I disagree. As noted above we all have a responsibility to stay current. If >we choose to do this by pursuing a tDPT fine. There are a myriad of other >ways of staying current. No matter what way you choose you will have to put >the time and resources into professional development. Again we are talking perceptions. If DPT does for PT as many hope it will, who will get the higher nod: a DPT or an OCS? I believe an OCS carries quite bit more weight in my eyes, but will it with the public? Not if we're strutting around calling ourselves "doctors." >I don't understand this point. I don't see how the DPT takes away from other >post professional degrees. Because it places an entry level DPT at the same level as post professional DPTs or PhDs. The difference may be explained to someone who asks the gory details, but most people take a title at face value. >I agree with residencies however it is a separate and distinct issue from >DPT. I don't think so. It calls to question what our purpose is in advancing the profession and how we wish to go about it. While a newly graduated DPT may posess greater skills than a new MPT or BS PT, they would rarely have the skills to do more than the rudimentary therapy capable of any therapist with such a broad scope of education. PT students are expected to learn everything about everything PT related. This makes it impossible to hone the skills necessary to be a master clinician in any specific area of practice. I would never presume to know much about treating ACL repairs or plantar fasciitis, but I could run the table on the advanced treatment of a SCI patient. This comes from specialized experience in this area, something I did not posess at graduation. If we want better clinicians, we need to better prepare them for the specific field they are going into. Very few PT's I know hop from arena to arena; they find a niche and stick to it. I wish I had had the opportunity to complete a neuro residency before practicing as a full fledged PT. It would have greatly facilitated my entry level abilities. We need more capable specialists in this profession, not generally educated "doctors." It is a pleasure debating this issue with you Doug! Again warm regards! Geoff