Needs Assessment of Faculty and Program Directors in Physical Therapist Assistant Education Programs: Implications for Development

Abstract

Background and Purpose. Declining enrollments and more stringent evaluative criteria for accreditation have had a substantial impact on the faculty and program directors of physical therapist assistant education programs. This survey was conducted to determine the perceived job-related needs of faculty and program directors in physical therapist assistant education programs, their workload, and preferences for faculty development activities. Subjects. A preliminary questionnaire was sent to the directors of the published list of 261 accredited physical therapist assistant education programs. Based on the responses, 414 full-time faculty tvere identified as subjects. Methods. Needs assessment instruments that addressed the areas of teaching, scholarship, and administration were mailed to the subjects. Usable survey questionnaires were returned by 340 individuals (82% response rate). Results. Respondents expressed extensive needs in all 26 items rated. When categorized, they were ranked as scholarship, administration, and then teaching. Respondents to shift their workload from teaching to scholarship, and they ranked workshops and personal assessments highest for faculty development activities. Discussion and Conclusions. The findings of this study indicate that faculty and program directors in physical therapist assistant education programs have extensive perceived needs in their academic roles, especially in the area of scholarship. Workloads and faculty development activities should he designed for this target audience to provide opportunities to address these areas. Key Words: Faculty development, Needs assessment, Physical therapist assistant education. INTRODUCTION Recent actions by the federal government, the Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education (CAPTE), and the American Physical Therapy Association (Al1TA) have resulted in a climate of profound change for physical therapist assistant (ITA) education programs. For example, the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and subsequent rulings of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS, formerly known as the Health Care Financing Administration) limited the reimbursement for physical therapy services. Private health insurance companies likewise restricted reimbursement and frequency of visits for physical therapy services. This had an immediate negative impact on the employment of PTAs and secondary impact of unprecedented decreased enrollment and subsequent termination of academic programs.1,2 New Evaluative Criteria for Accreditation of Education Programs for the Preparation of Physical Therapist Assistants (Evaluative Criteria)3 were adopted by CAPTE in 2000 and took effect on January 1, 2002. The Evaluative Criteria identified a requisite number of core faculty (2) and minimum characteristics for program directors (master's degree). This caused extensive concern for many PTA program directors who might not be able to secure the resources necessary to maintain an accredited status for the program. Finally, transition to the doctoral degree as the professional-level degree for physical therapists (PTs) has fostered more discussion on the education level for the FIA. In response to these and other factors, the APTA House of Delegates (HOD) charged APTA in 2001 to collaborate with the National Assembly of Physical Therapist Assistants and conduct a study of the preferred future rote of the physical therapist assistant (PTA) including education level, scope of work within physical therapy, employment, and potential market factors.4(p31) while the results of this study due in 2003 will provide long-term planning for the clinical role and academic preparation of the PTA, dicy will not address the immediate impact of diese forces on the faculty and program directors of the PTA education programs. If change Is on the horizon for these individuals, effective faculty development activities must be provided to ensure appropriate performance levels. …