Selectivity of physiotherapist programs in the United States does not differ by institutional funding source or research activity level.
Date
2016
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Repository Usage Stats
views
downloads
Citation Stats
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare selectivity characteristics among institution characteristics to determine differences by institutional funding source (public vs. private) or research activity level (research vs. non-research). METHODS: This study included information provided by the Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education (CAPTE) and the Federation of State Boards of Physical Therapy. Data were extracted from all students who graduated in 2011 from accredited physical therapy programs in the United States. The public and private designations of the institutions were extracted directly from the classifications from the 'CAPTE annual accreditation report,' and high and low research activity was determined based on Carnegie classifications. The institutions were classified into four groups: public/research intensive, public/non-research intensive, private/research intensive, and private/non-research intensive. Descriptive and comparison analyses with post hoc testing were performed to determine whether there were statistically significant differences among the four groups. RESULTS: Although there were statistically significant baseline grade point average differences among the four categorized groups, there were no significant differences in licensure pass rates or for any of the selectivity variables of interest. CONCLUSION: Selectivity characteristics did not differ by institutional funding source (public vs. private) or research activity level (research vs. non-research). This suggests that the concerns about reduced selectivity among physiotherapy programs, specifically the types that are experiencing the largest proliferation, appear less warranted.
Type
Department
Description
Provenance
Subjects
Citation
Permalink
Published Version (Please cite this version)
Publication Info
Riley, Sean P, Kyle Covington, Michel D Landry, Christine McCallum, Chalee Engelhard and Chad E Cook (2016). Selectivity of physiotherapist programs in the United States does not differ by institutional funding source or research activity level. J Educ Eval Health Prof, 13. p. 17. 10.3352/jeehp.2016.13.17 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/12018.
This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
Collections
Scholars@Duke
![Covington](https://scholars.duke.edu/profile-images/thumbnail200/0279169.jpg)
Jeffrey Kyle Covington
Dr. Covington is a neurologic physical therapist and 2004 graduate of the Duke DPT Program. He joined the faculty in 2007 and served as the Associate Director of Clinical Education from 2007-2014. During that time he led DPT Clinical STEPs® (Student Team Experience in Practice) course series in the first six semesters of the curriculum which places teams of students in clinical practice during their course work. The creation of this new clinical education curricular format included significant educational program planning, assessment and evaluation. In 2015, Dr. Covington completed his PhD in Educational Research and Policy Analysis at North Carolina State University. Study emphases included adult learning theory, educational program planning and assessment. In 2015 Dr. Covington was named the Duke DPT Program's Director of Assessment and Evaluation. In addition, Dr. Covington's experience as a neurologic PT is utilized in the classroom during our Foundational Examination and Neurologic Practice Management Course work. Dr. Covington's research interests in collaborative student learning, and professional development of physical therapists and their embodied use of movement in expert practice.
Unless otherwise indicated, scholarly articles published by Duke faculty members are made available here with a CC-BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial) license, as enabled by the Duke Open Access Policy. If you wish to use the materials in ways not already permitted under CC-BY-NC, please consult the copyright owner. Other materials are made available here through the author’s grant of a non-exclusive license to make their work openly accessible.