University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

An evaluation of select athletic training education programs administration and educational structure

(USC Thesis Other)

An evaluation of select athletic training education programs administration and educational structure

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI fiims
the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and
dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of
computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the
copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations
and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction..
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by
sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing
from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced
xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9” black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing
in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
ProQuest Information and Learning
300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, M l 48106-1346 USA
800-521-0600
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
AN EVALUATION OF SELECT ATHLETIC TRAINING EDUCATION
PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION AND EDUCATIONAL STRUCTURE
by
Keith Wayne Freesemann
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment o f the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2000
Copyright 2000 Keith Wayne Freesemann
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
U M I Number: 3018000
Copyright 2000 by
Freesemann, Keith Wayne
All rights reserved.
___ _ ®
UMI
UMI Microform 3018000
Copyright 2001 by Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company
300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
School o f Education
Los Angeles, California 90089-0031
This dissertation, written by
k e ~ l- L k \ J d y / \ e >
under the direction o f h i s — D issertation Committee, and
approved by a ll members o f the Committee, has been
presented to and accepted by the Faculty o f the School
o f Education in partialfulfillm ent o f the requirementsfar
the degree o f
D o c t o r o f E d u c a t io n
Dissertation Committee
Chairperson
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A sincere and special thank you is extended to my dissertation committee chair,
Dr. Kaaren I. Hoffman, for her expertise, insight, guidance, and understanding during this
research study. My appreciation is also extended to my dissertation committee members,
Dr. Maurice Hitchcock and Dr. Linda S. Hagedom, and to a colleague, Dr. Janet M.
Fisher, for their commitment, support, and suggestions during the completion o f the
dissertation.
A very special recognition and expression of gratitude are well deserved to my
wife and son, Suzanne and Maxwell, for their love, patience, and encouragement during
this endeavor. In addition, a personal thank you to our parents, families and friends for
their caring, support, and motivation during this project.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
in
Table o f Contents
Page
Acknowledgments.................................................................................................... ii
List o f Tables............................................................................................................. v
Abstract...................................................................................................................... vii
Chapters
I. Introduction............................................................................................ 1
n . Literature R e v ie w ................................................................................. 11
in . M ethod.................................................................................................... 44
IV. Results.................................................................................................... 52
V. Discussion............................................................................................. 86
Conclusions...................................................................................... 91
Recommendations ........................................................................ 94
Bibliography............................................................................................................. 100
Appendixes
Appendix A ................................................................................................. 108
Appendix B ................................................................................................. 117
Appendix C ................................................................................................. 121
Appendix D .................................................................................................. 129
Appendix E .................................................................................................. 138
Appendix F .................................................................................................. 140
Appendix G .................................................................................................. 142
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Appendix H
Appendix I .
iv
144
148
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
V
List o f Tables
TABLE Page
1. Summary of Academic Department Home of CAAHEP Accredited
Athletic Training Education Programs..................................................... 57
2. Collapsed Summary of Academic Home of CAAHEP Accredited
Athletic Training Education Program s.........................................................58
3. Summary of Chain of Command of CAAHEP Accredited Athletic
Training Education Program s....................................................................... 59
4. Summary of Academic Department Home Characteristics of the
CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education Program.....................59
5. Characteristic Summary o f CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training
Education Program s....................................................................................... 60
6. Regulation Summary o f CAAHEP Approved Athletic Training
Education Programs....................................................................................... 61
7. Structure Summary of CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training
Education Programs....................................................................................... 64
8. Summary of Athletic Training Faculty of CAAHEP Accredited
Athletic Training Education Program s.........................................................65
9. Summary of Role and Responsibilities of Athletic Training Faculty
of CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs............... 66
10. Summary of Athletic Trainers in Athletics of CAAHEP Accredited
Athletic Training Education Program s.........................................................67
11. Summary of Academic and Clinical Evaluation Activities of CAAHEP
Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs..................................... 69
12. Summary of Student Performance on the NATABOC Certification
Examination of CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education
Programs.........................................................................................................75
13. Selected Administrative Structure Questions for the Correlation
and ANOVA Comparisons............................................................................76
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
V i
14. Pearson Correlation o f Selected Administrative Structure Questions
and the 1997 NATABOC Certification Performance of CAAHEP
Program s.......................................................................................................... 78
15. Pearson Correlation o f Selected Administrative Structure Questions
and the 1998 NATABOC Certification Performance of CAAHEP
Program s.......................................................................................................... 79
16. Mean Differences on the Simulation Test given the Presence or
Absence o f Unique Coordinator o f Clinical Education...............................80
17. Mean Differences on the Written Test given the Program Director’s
Role for Academic Activities Only versus Both Academic and
Clinical Activities.............................................................................................81
18. Mean Differences o f the Written Test, Practical Test, and Simulation
Test given Collegial Organizational Culture versus Non-collegial
Organizational Culture....................................................................................81
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
vii
Abstract
Keith W. Freesemann Kaaren I. Hoffman
An Evaluation of Select Athletic Training Education
Programs Administration and Educational Structure
For some years now, Athletic Training has been undergoing professional
development as an allied health discipline. At present, the profession is at a critical
juncture in its educational reform as it modifies its academic model to meet the
accreditation criteria o f the Commission on Accreditation o f Allied Health Education
Program(s) (CAAHEP) and to meet the certification standards of the National Athletic
Trainers Association Board of Certification (NATABOC) by the year 2004. The
accreditation criteria imply a certain minimum level o f educational and administrative
resources, such as faculty and clinical services, that many athletic training education
programs may find hard to meet. A survey was administered to all CAAHEP accredited
athletic training education programs (a response rate of 57%) to identify the administrative
characteristics of currently accredited programs and to examine the relationships between
these administrative characteristics and success rates o f the NATABOC certification
examination. Besides the survey, qualitative interviews were conducted with educational
leaders at two schools, one CAAHEP accredited and one former NATAPEC approved but
not yet accredited by CAAHEP. These case study interviews provided information on the
perceived importance of the selected administrative features for successful accreditation
and for success on the NATABOC certification examination.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Results of the study suggest the following: 1) the contextual and environmental
characteristics (i.e., its size, location, etc.) of CAAHEP accredited athletic training
education programs may not be related to the decision to obtain or maintain CAAHEP
accreditation nor do they appear to be related to success on the certification examination;
2) the type of leadership and management structure of the CAAHEP accredited program
does seem to have an impact on the decision to obtain or maintain accreditation and on
success on the certification examination. Significant associations at the p<.05 or p<.01
levels were found between selected administrative characteristics (i.e. program director
role, type o f organizational culture, and the number of academic athletic training faculty,
etc.) o f the programs and the student performance on the various subcategories (i.e.
written, practical and simulation) of the NATABOC certification examination.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
1
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
An athletic trainer is defined as a qualified allied health care professional who has
been educated and has experience in the management of health care problems associated
with sports participation (Committee on Allied Health Education and Accreditation, 1991;
Gray, 1997; http://www.nata.org, August 11, 1999). The athletic trainer serves as an
integral member o f the athlete’s health care team and functions in a variety o f settings such
as secondary school and college’s athletics programs, corporate or industrial health care
programs, sports medicine clinics and health clubs. Interaction and cooperation with
medical personnel, athletic administrators, coaches and parents is necessary for the
development o f efficient and responsive athletic health care delivery (Committee on Allied
Health Education and Accreditation, 1991; Amheim, 1997; Gray, 1997).
Athletic training has been developing as a profession (1938 to the present) and in
many ways this professional development has been following a process o f maturation seen
as typical for professions in general. This professional development process has been
described as: (a) evidence o f internship or service programs, (b) development of
educational objectives, goals, and competency skills, (c) development of standards for
program admission and student selection, (d) certification or licensure, (e) curriculum
development and implementation, (f) state or national regulation, (g) relationship of the
profession to the educational institution, (h) continuing education, and (i) the relationship
of the professions education and service to that of other professions (Flexner, 1915;
Anderson, 1974; Broadbent, Dietrich, & Roberts, 1997; Middlehurst & Kennie, 1997 ).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
At this point in time (1999), the profession o f athletic training is at a critical
junction in its development. It has been moving from an “intern/service” based model to
one based on an “approved curriculum” and now is moving to a more formal academic
model where each program meets certain accreditation standards. The accreditation
process will be overseen by the Commission o f the Accreditation o f Allied Health
Education Programs (CAAHEP) which is an American Medical Association (AMA)
subcommittee. A subcommittee o f CAAHEP, entitled the Joint Review Committee -
Athletic Training (IRC-AT), has developed and defined the criteria for accreditation. By
the year 2004, all candidates seeking certification in athletic training must have graduated
from an accredited program (McMullan, 1996; National Athletic Trainers’ Association,
1997; National Athletic Trainers’ Association Education Task Force, 1997; McMullan,
1997) . These criteria for accreditation imply a certain minimum level o f educational and
administrative resources, such as faculty and clinical activities, that many programs may
find hard to meet.
Background
University athletic training education programs before June 1993 (National
Athletic Trainers Association, 1994) were “approved as a curriculum program in athletic
training by the National Athletic Trainers Association Professional Education Committee
(NATAPEC). The NATAPEC, a subcommittee of the National Athletic Trainers
Association, Inc. (NATA), was responsible for the review and approval o f athletic training
education programs. Students graduating from a NATAPEC approved “curriculum”
athletic training education programs were able to sit for the certification examination
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
3
administered by the National Athletic Trainers Association Board o f Certification
(NATABOC) under the eligibility section o f curriculum programs.
The NATA, Inc. sought recognition o f the athletic training discipline and its
educational programs by the American Medical Association (AMA) as an allied health
profession. In 1990 the AMA recognized athletic training as an allied health discipline.
As a result the NATA, Inc. began development and implementation o f essentials and
guidelines to conform to the AMA educational program accreditation requirements.
CAAHEP is the AMA subcommittee responsible for education program accreditation. The
Joint Review Committee - Athletic Training (JRT-AT) falls under CAAHEP and is
charged with the responsibility o f developing and establishing the minimum essentials
(standards or criteria) and guidelines for athletic training education programs.
In 1991, NATAPEC approved athletic training education programs began the
conversion to the CAAHEP accreditation requirements. Initially, only NATAPEC
approved “curriculum” athletic training education programs sought the CAAHEP
accreditation requirements. In time, other Universities have developed athletic training
education programs and sought CAAHEP accreditation.
Between 1991 and 1993 athletic training education programs at the end of then-
five-year NATAPEC “approval” period had the choice of NATAPEC approval or
Commission on the Accreditation o f Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP)
accreditation (Behnke, 1991). hi 1993 the NATAPEC was dissolved, thus, in 1993, all
Universities seeking accreditation o f athletic training education programs must meet
requirements of and be approved by the JRT-AT of CAAHEP. A University athletic
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
4
training education program approved by the JRT-AT will then be accredited by CAAHEP.
An athletic training education program that has shown and documented all
essentials and guidelines for accreditation compliance will be approved for five years.
With the CAAHEP accreditation granted, a University program has the right to educate
and guide performance of the practical/manual practice of athletic training.
The criteria for certification have been documented by the JRT-AT in a document
entitled “Essentials and Guidelines for an Accredited Educational Program in Athletic
Training” (See Appendix A for Essentials and Guidelines) (Committee on Allied Health
Education and Accreditation, 1991). The Essentials are the minimum standards of quality
used in accrediting programs that prepare individuals for entry level into the profession of
athletic training. An athletic training education program and its academic unit are held
accountable for the minimum standards. The Essentials and Guidelines is divided into
three sections which deal with recommended administrative and educational resources,
curriculum and accreditation procedures respectively. Section I deals with the general
requirements for accreditation. It provides guidelines for personnel, instructional staff,
medical and allied health personnel, university support, and financial and physical
resources in order to develop and maintain an effective educational program. While
specific quantities and structure of personnel etc. are not required, the section does seem
to imply a certain minimum level o f educational resources and this implication raises
several pertinent questions including: (a) Are these educational resources available to all
athletic training education programs? (b) What problems are there historically and
organizationally that stand in the way o f obtaining these educational resources? (c) Do
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
current accredited (CAAHEP) athletic training programs have these educational
resources? (d) Do these educational resources serve as barriers to accreditation
(CAAHEP)? (e) What is the link between these educational resources and program
success on the certification examination (NATABOC)?
Purpose o f the Study
This study seeks to identify the administrative characteristics of current CAAHEP
accredited athletic training programs; to investigate the relationship between these
characteristics and a program’s success rate on the NATA certification examination; and
to investigate any impact the characteristics might have on the decision by academic units
to pursue or maintain a CAAHEP accredited athletic training program. The specific
research questions o f interest are:
Research Question 1.
What are the contextual and environmental characteristics of CAAHEP accredited
athletic training programs and in what way do such characteristics influence obtaining or
maintaining CAAHEP accreditation? Areas specifically investigated are:
a) University setting.
b) Program location within the university (Academic Home).
c) Athletic training program and student characteristics.
d) State regulations.
e) Program relationships with community allied health personnel.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
6
Research Question 2.
What is the nature o f the administrative structure o f CAAHEP accredited
programs and how is this structure seen to impact the accreditation process? Of specific
interest are:
a) The program’s management structure.
b) The program’s organizational culture and structure.
c) The number and status o f the faculty.
d) The relationship between athletic training faculty and the athletic personnel.
e) The structure o f clinical and academic activities.
f) The nature o f the student evaluation process.
Research Question 3.
Do associations exist between the administrative characteristics o f CAAHEP
programs and student performance on the national certification examination?
Research Question 4.
Do associations exist between university or departmental contextual variables and
student performance on the national certification examination?
Importance of the Study
While the Essentials and Guidelines published by the JRC-AT outline the areas
programs must consider and the outcomes desired, it does not specify the ways in which
such areas might be best handled, nor does it suggest solutions or strategies for reaching
the desired outcomes. NATA “approved” programs are faced with several decisions and
may face real or imagined barriers to attaining accreditation. To date only 68 of the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
7
original 84 NATAPEC approved athletic training education programs have been
CAAHEP accredited. In addition, only 23 of more than 1000 possible internship athletic
training education programs have converted to CAAHEP accreditation. It appears many
programs are struggling with whether or not they have or could obtain the educational
resources which seem to be required.
For example, one major education resource issue in athletic training education is
personnel; the need for full time academic athletic training faculty. Historically, the typical
administrative and academic structure of athletic training education involved a personnel
appointment in two university departments: Athletics and Physical Education/Kinesiology.
This dual personnel appointment actually means the individual has a staff appointment
with responsibilities in intercollegiate athletics as a clinical athletic trainer and an academic
appointment as a faculty member (a part-time lecturer, an instructor, a professorship, etc.).
Such dual appointments have the potential for conflicting loyalties and divided
responsibilities. In addition, university employment practices in academia tend to
compound the issue o f a full time faculty in athletic training by hiring individuals with
athletic training expertise but little academic experience or athletic training expertise but
little clinical experience. As a faculty member in an academic department, the individual’s
performance standards must comply with the academic rigors o f the tenure process (e.g.
teaching effectiveness, scholarly and creative activities, grants, publications, terminal
degree, service) which places an even more extensive demand on their time.
hi the past year, this investigator conducted an informal survey of the five athletic
training education programs within the California State University (CSU) system
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
8
previously approved by the NATAPEC to determine the administrative structure and
academic configuration of their athletic training education programs. In each case, the
academic department had one full time tenured or tenure track individual in academia with
expertise in athletic training who functioned as the program director o f their athletic
training education program No other full-time academic appointments existed in the
athletic training program Overall, the academic department used part-time faculty for
instruction but also relied heavily on the athletic trainers in intercollegiate athletics to
provide clinical and didactic instruction. Such an academic program in athletic training
education with only one full-time tenured/track faculty member in the academic area and
part timers in athletics may jeopardize academic and clinical accountability as set forth in
the essentials and guidelines by CAAHEP. In addition, insufficient administrative
structure or faculty may influence or compromise a student’s potential success on the
professional certification examination.
Academic departments offering programs with minimum faculty, resources, and
content expertise may experience a lack of sustained success in program enrollment,
accreditation, university expectations, and eventually the loss o f a professional program
(Odden & Picus, 1992; Whalen, 1991; A.B. 1725, 1988; A.B. 420, 1999). Such
overwork o f the faculty and staff in athletic training may be in inefficient in the delivery of
quality academic instruction, assessment of clinical experience, and program stability. For
example, an external review of the Kinesiology academic major program at CSU-Long
Beach 5-year Program Review (Higgins, 1998) revealed a recommendation that the
Department concentrate future tenure track position requests in academic option areas
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
9
with currently less than two tenured/tenure track professors. The recommendation for a
minimum of two or more faculty in each option area or discipline implies that more than
one faculty member provides discipline stability and depth o f expertise in specific content
areas, hi this regard, the academic faculty position pattern in athletic training at the
universities in the CSU System, with only one full time position, is o f concern, and
further, such a pattern may exist throughout the United States.
This study hopes to shed light on just what educational and administrative
resources current CAAHEP accredited programs possess and to discover how these
resources are viewed and valued by those who have undertaken or who are considering
undertaking the accreditation process. Such information might help clarify what are the
basic minimal requirements or direction o f environments for academic and instructional
experiences seem to be appropriate.
Conceptual Assumptions
The following conceptual assumptions will be made:
1. The terminology used to describe the administrative and clinical structure is
familiar to the participants in the survey.
2. It is assumed that the program directors or their delegate are knowledgeable
and able to answer.
3. The respondents understood the questions and answered honestly.
Limitations
The following conditions are beyond the control o f the investigator o f this study.
1. Data from the survey will be self-reported.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
10
2. Sample restricted to CAAHEP accredited undergraduate athletic training
programs with accreditation years of one to six years.
3. The identified sample is limited to the program directors or their delegate of
CAAHEP accredited undergraduate athletic training education programs.
4. CAAHEP accredited athletic training education programs may be reluctant to
share accurate performance data from the professional certification
examination.
5. The cooperation and honesty o f responses given by the program director or
their delegate may affect the outcome of the study.
6. Data for exploring the value and importance o f the various administrative
characteristics will be limited to personnel from two programs, one currently
accredited and one which has not yet undergone the accreditation process.
Definitions o f Terms
AMA - American Medical Association
CAAHEP - Commission of Accreditation o f Allied Health Education Programs
JRT-AT - Joint Review Committee-Athletic Training
NATA, Inc. - National Athletic Trainers Association, Inc.
NATABOC - National Athletic Trainers Association, Inc. Board of Certification
Professional Certification Examination - athletic training competency examinations
developed and administered by the NATABOC.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER n
Review of Literature
The literature review has been arranged under the following topics: (1) Profession
Development, (2) Professional and Historical Development o f Athletic Training, (3)
Development of the Certification Examination, (4) Education Resources, and (5)
Organizational Culture and Structure.
Profession Development
A profession is a group o f individuals that understand, maintain, and control a
privileged body of knowledge. This privileged knowledge creates a professional that
possesses skills only other professionals of the same designation or occupation can gain
with a lifetime public career commitment (Flexner, 1915; Anderson, 1974; Bailey, 1991).
A profession is also unique by having the authority (e.g., license, certification, law ) to
perform a particular service. Each individual profession has its own distinctive body of
knowledge and skills (e.g., athletic training, law, medicine, dentistry, nursing, physical
therapy, etc.), (Friedson, 1986; McGaghie, 1991). The disciplines’ distinctiveness may
contribute to a profession’s character and a climate that it has very little to learn from or
to share with other professional fields. The general public’s ability to recognize the
characteristics, responsibilities, and skills of a profession establishes the disciplines’
individuality and uniqueness. A profession’s uniqueness is also characterized by the
diversity and age of the clientele it serves.
A great variety of methods of education (e.g., community college, liberal arts
college, university, or independent school) exist for the different professions, as well as the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
12
forms of professional practice (Anderson, 1974; Bailey, 1991). The method o f education
for a discipline delineates the difference between ‘learned professions’ and “other”
professions. The type of educational institution where the professional education occurs
does vary. Depending on the educational setting, the completion o f a professional
education program could result in a baccalaureate degree, graduate degree, professional
degree, or a professional certificate, hi addition, a profession’s educational program may
be limited to study in an undergraduate institution, graduate professional school, or a
combination o f both.
Disciplines emerge as professions over time due to societal need and demand or
the persistence, visibility, and stable existence o f the profession’s educational programs
(e.g., engineering, dentistry, athletic training, physical therapy) (Delforge, 1983; Friedson,
1986; McGaghie, 1991; National Athletic Trainers’ Association, 1990; National Athletic
Trainers’ Association, 1997; National Athletic Trainers’ Association Education Task
Force, 1997; Starkey, 1997). Medicine, law, and ministry are professions with historical
formal education programs, but not all occupations have a rich history of formal education
(e.g., journalism). Early members o f developing disciplines (e.g., journalism) did not have
formal education but developed their expertise through experience, independent study, or
informal apprenticeships.
Friedson (1986) identifies three classic professions that have been historically
predominant: ministry, medicine, and law. These professions can trace their histories to
the birth of the universities. Ministry, medicine, and law can no longer be considered the
only professions. In today’s society hundreds o f disciplines exist that have a professional
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
13
status. These professions have matured because o f their associations with universities and
requirements for credentialing or licensing. The evolution and survival of any profession
is based on the general population’s intellect, ethical climate, ethnic/cultural demands,
environment, and technology as dictated by the times.
McGaghie (1991) suggests that continual revision o f the concept of a profession
and its foundational characteristics result from the western industrial revolution and the
expansion o f educational opportunities in secondary and higher education in the United
States and Western Europe. For example, today’s society has hundreds of occupational
groups that claim a professional status because o f affiliations with universities, complex
credentialing procedures, and/or licensing restrictions (McGaghie, 1991).
Flexner (1915) made statements about the professional characteristics of a
discipline that have served as a conceptual basis for a profession’s definition, development,
and evolution. Additional researchers (Anderson, 1974, Friedson, 1986; McGaghie, 1991,
Bailey, 1991) have attempted to define and redefine the ideas and various viable
characteristics o f a profession. Regardless, the same common questions about a profession
recur: a) What is the definition of the profession? b) What are the criteria that establish
an occupation as a professional? c) What are the occupational categories for
professionals? d) How many professionals are there?, and e) What is the dimension of
their education?
Despite time, professional evolution has four foundational characteristics. The
first characteristic is that all professional activities have a large intellectual component,
wherein the skill and practice o f a profession depend on this body o f knowledge. The
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
14
intellectual content o f the profession may change over the years due to advances in
technology and research discoveries. For example, the content and practice of medicine
100 hundred years ago are not the same today (Bailey, 1991). The knowledge content of
a profession is empirically based and is the result o f research or scholarly activity. A
second characteristic is the practice of a profession. The practice of the profession
involves skills, meaning knowledge is put to use; this practice is teachable, leamable, and
is socially useful. A third characteristic is that society permits those who practice a
profession a great measure of control over their destiny and their right to be self-policing.
The quality o f the professional service, it is presumed, is to be judged only by other
professionals in the same field. So, a profession is also governed by a code of ethical
conduct to which its members are held. The final characteristic is professional judgement.
The professional practices his or her knowledge and skills in the terms of objective and
subjective professional judgment. In rendering such judgments the professional operates
autonomously, although professional consultations and peer judgements may occur.
Although Flexner’s (1915) original views o f a profession are complex, its concepts
and criteria are generic and can easily be understood by individuals educating professionals
(Anderson, 1974). Their purpose is very meaningful in providing the necessary guidance
for an occupation/discipline in pursuit of recognition as a profession. These professional
foundational concepts and criteria are very important for emerging professions in order to
deal with the following six issues effectively: a) educational objectives and goals, b)
educational concerns of student selection, c) curriculum, d) continuing education,
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
15
e) relationship o f the profession to the educational institution, and f) the relationship of
education and service to other professions and paraprofessionals.
Education is dynamic, its content is in a constant state of evolution considered
normal in education (Bailey, 1991). Education in professions never reach an ideal state
but continue to develop and move toward it. Professions are constantly challenged to
address human need, social changes, national and global needs, to broaden their scope of
service, and to become more accessible to the public. If a profession wishes to survive
extinction, it will never reach a state of constant stability or obtain an “ideal state.”
Professional and Historical Development o f Athletic Training
The allied health care professional in the discipline o f athletic training is known as
an athletic trainer. The CAAHEP Essentials and Guidelines (Committee on Allied Health
Education and Accreditation, 1991; Gray, 1997) define an athletic trainer as a qualified
allied health care professional educated and experienced in the management of health care
problems associated with sports participation. The athletic trainer works cooperatively
with physicians and other allied health care personnel in providing contemporary athletic
health care. In the traditional athletic training setting, the athletic trainer functions as an
integral member o f the athletic health care team in secondary school interscholastic athletic
programs, intercollegiate athletic programs, professional athletic programs, and athletic
training education programs. During the past fifteen years the athletic trainers’ work
environment has migrated into the nontraditional athletic training clinical setting. The
nontraditional athletic training setting includes the corporate health care programs, sports
medicine clinics, physical therapy clinics, health clubs, and clinical and industrial health
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
16
care programs. The contemporary athletic trainer, in collaboration with medical
personnel, athletic administrators, coaches, and parents, develops and coordinates efficient
and effective athletic health care delivery systems. Professional education and clinical
preparation o f the athletic trainer are directed toward the development of specified
competencies in the following areas: a) prevention o f athletic injuries; b) recognition,
evaluation, and immediate care of athletic injuries; c) rehabilitation and reconditioning;
d) health care administration; and e) professional development and responsibility
(Committee on Allied Health Education and Accreditation, 1991; Gray, 1997).
History
A literature review (Schwank & Miller, 1971; O ’Shea, 1980; Delforge, 1983;
Newell, 1984; Delforge, 1984; Kauth, 1984; National Athletic Trainers’ Association,
1990; Committee on Allied Health Education and Accreditation, 1991; McMullan, 1996;
Catalano 1997; Starkey, 1997) shows that the task o f athletic training has existed in
various forms starting with the Greek civilization in 420 B.C.. Throughout time the
occupational title o f “athletic trainer” has varied depending on the different individuals
who carried out the “athletic training” tasks. Society has called these individual’s
surgeon, equipment manager, coach, masseuse, or doctor.
During the early 1800's the term “trainer” was not associated with a medical
connotation. It was associated with physical conditioning and coaching. Athletic trainers
did not formally exist in the early 1800's but the methods and equipment to prevent
injuries were being developed. Before the 1860's, athletic health care for a sports injury
was provided by one o f four approaches: a) the athletes cared for their own injuries, b) a
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
17
teammate cared for the injuries, c) a spectator provided assistance, or d) an opposing team
member cared for the injury (Bailey, 1974). The development of the modem day athletic
trainer began during the time o f 1865-1906 (Bailey, 1974). The first documented evidence
o f an individual being hired as a professional athletic trainer (medical connotation) was Jim
Robinson at Harvard University in 1880. Athletic trainers have evolved from an individual
who did therapeutic massage duties in the 1800's to a well-educated, highly trained,
certified professional in the 1990's.
The Trainer Bible, the first athletic training book, was written by Dr. S.E. Bilik in
1917. Publication o f The Trainer Bible signified the need to formalize standards of care in
the athletic training discipline. During the early 1900's the athletic caregiver (commonly
called a trainer) were former athletes, usually boxers, with a strong desire to help people.
Their primary duties consisted o f massage for injury relief and soft tissue relaxation. As a
result, these “athletic trainers” were called “rubbers.” Athletic trainers did not have a
formal education program but gained their knowledge and skill through practical
experience. The first notation o f an athletic trainer possessing an educational degree was
Henry Schmidt in 1927. Education and clinical interest in athletic training slowly evolved
in the athletics environment o f the colleges, universities, and professional sports.
The Cramer Family o f Gardner, Kansas started a chemical company (early 1920's)
to manufacture a liniment used as a medical treatment for ankle sprains (Arnheim &
Prentice, 1997). This liniment was used by university and college athletic trainers to treat
athletic injuries. Eventually, the Cramer Family became very instrumental in the
development and financial support of athletic training. In 1932, Cramer Products began
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
18
publication of “The First Aider” to enhance communication among coaches, athletic
trainers, and athletes.
The late 1930's brought organized efforts by university and college athletic trainers
to establish a national organization to be called the National Athletic Trainers Association.
Efforts to organize were difficult and the National Athletic Trainers Association struggled
for existence between 1938 and 1944, eventually disappearing during World War n . After
World War n , between 1947 and 1950, university and college athletic trainers reorganized
themselves into regional conferences rather than a national organization. However, the
regional conferences were precursors of the districts within a national organization that
become known as the National Athletic Trainers Association (NATA). The most critical
development point of the athletic training profession was in 1950 when 101 athletic
trainers from the various regional conferences met in Kansas City, MO to officially form
the National Athletic Trainers Association. The 1950 mission of the NATA was to “build
and strengthen the profession o f athletic training through the exchange o f ideas,
knowledge and methods o f athletic training” (O’Shea, 1980). Since 1950 the professional
emergence of athletic training has paralleled the development o f the National Athletic
Trainers Association (Delforge & Behnke, 1999).
In 1955 William E. Newell, athletic trainer at Purdue University, was appointed
National Secretary of the NATA. William E. “Pinky” Newell became known as the father
of modem day athletic training and is credited with the foresight and impetus to develop
certification and education programs (Foster, 1995; Perrin, 1999). Newell received this
recognition because he established the Committee on Gaining Recognition. This
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
19
committee was the precursor to the NATAPEC which was responsible for athletic training
education program development and approval until June 1998. hi 1956, The NATA
studied strategies of professional enhancement for athletic training and selected a model
that emphasized athletic training education and a national certification program o f athletic
trainers.
A curriculum model for an educational program in athletic training was approved
by the NATA in 1959 (Schwank & Miller, 1971; O’Shea, 1980). The curriculum model
included two important features that reflected athletic trainers’ employability in the 1950s
and 1960s (Delforge & Behnke, 1999). The two major features o f the curriculum were a)
attainment o f a secondary-level teaching credential, and b) course work representing
prerequisites for admission to physical therapy schools of the American Physical Therapy
Association.
As discussed earlier, the dominant characteristic o f a profession is the identification
of a specialized body of knowledge. According to Delforge and Behnke (1999) the 1959
athletic training curriculum model attempted to identify a specific body of knowledge for
athletic trainers. However, the 1959 athletic training curriculum consisted of academic
work in four-year universities and colleges that existed in the departments o f physical
education or health with the addition o f a course in advanced athletic training and in
athletic training fieldwork. The ability to base the 1959 athletic training curriculum model
on competencies or learning outcomes specific to athletic training was not feasible. This
was not feasible because the athletic training educator had not emerged and a very small
number of athletic trainers and athletic training courses existed.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
20
The NATA athletic training curriculum model was approved in 1959 and served as
the framework for educational institutions to seek NATA approval for their athletic
training education programs. Ten years (1969) later the first four undergraduate athletic
training educational programs (Mankato State University, Indiana State University, Lamar
University, and the University of New Mexico) would seek and receive official NATA
approval (Delforge & Behnke, 1999). The early undergraduate athletic training education
programs were typically housed in Athletics. The athletic training courses offered were
housed in the Physical Education Department but the course’s instruction and the program
administration were managed by the athletic trainers in intercollegiate athletics. In 1969,
the NATA was concerned about the lack o f interest in athletic training education and
conducted a survey of all departments o f physical education in the United States regarding
the 1959 athletic training curriculum model (Schwank & Miller, 1971; Miller, 1971).
Schwank and Miller (1971) found that approximately 42% (Miller, 1971) o f all colleges
and universities in the United States were aware o f the athletic training curriculum model.
As a result the Committee on Gaining Recognition, renamed the Professional
Advancement Committee, was divided into two subcommittees: NATA Professional
Education and NATA Certification. Each subcommittee had a specific goal to
accomplish. The NATA Professional Education Committee forged forward with the
development, evaluation, and approval o f undergraduate athletic training education
programs. The NATA Certification Committee administered its first certification
examination in 1970. The implementation o f the professional education programs and
certification examination were two historical events that brought professional recognition
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
21
from other allied health disciplines. As discussed in Chapter I, acknowledgment was a
critical component for professional recognition and acceptance in the public sector.
NATA approved undergraduate athletic training education programs in colleges
and universities grew tremendously, from 4 to 62, between 1969 and 1982 (Delforge,
1982). As the educational programs grew and the students in athletic training increased,
the NATA Professional Education Committee revised the 1959 curriculum model. The
athletic training curriculum model introduced in the mid 1970s reflected less dependance
on course work in other disciplines (e.g., physical education and physical therapy) and
specific course development in athletic training. This revised curriculum reflected
progression to the athletic training profession’s specialized body of knowledge. It is
important to note that the attainment o f a teaching credential was a curriculum and
certification requirement until 1980. During the 1970s the NATA Professional
Education Committee developed behavioral objectives for learning outcomes in athletic
training that provided educational and clinical guidance. These behavioral objectives and
learning outcomes were the conceptual basis for development of the athletic training
competencies and components for the academic major in athletic training released by the
NATAPEC in 1983. The documents were the Competencies in Athletic Training and the
Guidelines for Development and Implementation of NATA Approved Undergraduate
Athletic Training Education Programs
Athletic training as an academic major was the landmark of the 1980s. The
NATAPEC mandated each undergraduate athletic training education program to develop
a course of study in athletic training as a degree granting academic major in their
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
22
university or college. The NATAPEC mandate specified a deadline of July 1, 1990 to
implement the athletic training major (Delforge, 1982). Based on the Competencies in
Athletic Training and the Guidelines for Development and Implementation of NATA
Approved Undergraduate Athletic Training Education Programs documents, the 1983
curriculum model reflected two major conceptual changes from the 1959 curriculum
model. The 1983 curriculum model specified: a) subject matter content rather than
courses, and b) competency-based performance.
The next step of professional recognition was educational program accreditation.
After consideration of several accreditation possibilities the NATA Board of Directors, in
1988, authorized the NATAPEC to pursue accreditation through CAHEA (Committee on
Allied Health Education and Accreditation). On June 22, 1990, the milestone in athletic
training professional growth and education occurred (National Athletic Trainers’
Association, 1990). The AMA formally recognized athletic training as an allied health
profession, thus allowing the NATAPEC to proceed with seeking accreditation. In early
December 1991, all documents and committees were in place to initiate the accreditation
process for undergraduate athletic training education programs. The NATAPEC ended its
approval process for undergraduate athletic training education programs in June 1993.
Thus, the only program accreditation for undergraduate athletic training education
programs was CAHEA. February 1994 marked the CAHEA accreditation of the first two
entry level athletic training education programs (Mathies, Denegar,& Arnhold, 1995).
Due to AMA reorganization of its agencies for accreditation of allied health education
programs, the new accreditation agency for athletic training education programs became
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
23
CAAHEP (Commission on Accreditation o f Allied Health Education Programs). The
accreditation process was essentially the same under CAAHEP as it was under CAHEA.
A significant change in undergraduate athletic training education policy occurred in
1997 when the NATA and NATABOC adopted a recommendation from the NATA
Education Task Force “to institute a requirement, to take effect in 2004, that, in order to
be eligible for NATABOC certification, all candidates must possess a baccalaureate degree
and have successfully completed a CAAHEP-accredited entry-level athletic training
education program’ (McMullan, 1996; National Athletic Trainer’s Association, 1997;
National Athletic Trainers Education Task Force, 1997; McMullan, 1997). This
significant change in undergraduate athletic training education policy is recognition of the
specialized body o f knowledge among certified athletic trainers (Delforge & Behnke,
1999).
Development of the Certification Examination
Disciplines in higher education institutions or in professional schools often measure
the academic and clinical success of their professional programs by their graduates’
performance on the discipline’s licensure and/or certification examination. The
discipline’s licensure or certification examination is a standardized test whereby all
graduates attempt to show competency o f their entry level abilities for practice in their
profession. The passage o f the licensure or certification examination means the individual
has met minimum standards and is authorized to practice in the discipline.
A professional academic and clinical educational program finds it highly desirable
that their graduate pass on the first test attempt with a high performance rate. Passing the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
24
examination on the first attempt with a high percentage rate measures the quality,
effectiveness, and competency o f the program and the institution. Professional programs
formally and informally rank accredited educational programs according to performance
on the licensure or certification examination (Voll, Goodwin, & Pitney, 1999). The
performance ranking affects an academic institution’s ability to compete for quality
students, to recruit quality faculty, to be awarded grants and related research monies, and
to provide effective graduate job placement (Voll, Goodwin, & Pitney, 1999). A more
critical issue implied by the ranking o f academic program’s performance is the
instructional effectiveness o f the discipline’s specialized body o f knowledge. The
specialized body of knowledge consists o f the disciplines’ theoretical concepts and
competencies for professional success.
The NATA Board o f Directors, in 1969, authorized the Professional Examination
Service to provide guidance, design, and development of the athletic training certification
examination. This certification examination content was developed by athletic trainers in
the field and administered by the Professional Examination Services. The testing agency,
Professional Examination Services (PES), was chosen because o f its long history of testing
experience in health and related fields.
The NATA’s first certification examination had four routes o f eligibility
requirements: a) graduation from an NATA-Approved undergraduate or graduate athletic
training education program b) completion of an apprenticeship program, c) a special
consideration route, or d) graduation from a school of physical therapy, (Westphalen &
McLean, 1978; Newell, 1984; Delforge & Behnke, 1999). The special consideration
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
25
route was primarily for athletic trainers who were “actively engaged” and salaried in the
field of athletic training for a minimum of five years. All candidates took the same athletic
training certification examination regardless of the route of certification eligibility.
The first NATA certification examination format consisted o f two parts: the
written test and the oral/practical test. The Professional Examination Services’
methodology set the foundation for creation of the content questions for the written
examination. Utilizing the PES’s methodology, “well respected” athletic trainers were
asked to write ten questions on topics that covered all aspects of their job (Westphalen &
McLean, 1978). Additional written questions were selected from PES’s question files.
Various independent consultants, independent reviewers, and psychometricians and editors
o f the PES staff critiqued the written questions. The format of the written examination
consisted of 150 questions covering content considered pertinent to athletic training.
Utilizing the PES methodology, “well respected” athletic trainers were asked to
participate in the development of the oral/practical examination that covered the practical
aspects of their job. The content o f the NATA oral/practical examination provided the
greatest challenge due to philosophical opinions regarding applicable skills and content.
After considerable conversation and compromise, the oral/practical examination was
completed. The format of the oral/practical examination consisted o f three clinical
exercises. Candidates for the athletic training certification examination must pass both the
written and the oral/practical sections to be considered “certified.”
In August 1970, the NATA Certification Committee administered the first entry
level certification examination for athletic training to fourteen individuals (Westphalen &
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
26
McLean, 1978). Over time, major content revisions occurred but only minor
modifications were made in the format o f the certification examination. The original
format of the NATA certification examination remained virtually unchanged until the mid
1980s.
Professional advancements in athletic training, professional education and
certification seem to parallel each other. Coinciding with major changes in athletic
training professional education (curriculum reform and competency identification) the
NATABOC conducted its first formal role delineation study of athletic training in 1982.
The role delineation study was administered to a select sample o f certified athletic trainers
that was representative of athletic training professional employment areas. A role
delineation study identifies the cognitive knowledge and clinical skills necessary for
practitioners to be competent and successful in the discipline. The athletic training role
delineation study identified performance domains that were incorporated immediately by
the NATAPEC and NATABOC into their respective programs. The findings o f the
athletic training role delineation study and their incorporation into education and
certification represented a significant movement towards true competency-based athletic
training education programs (Delforge & Behnke, 1999).
As discussed earlier, four routes to NATA certification eligibility had existed. In
the 1983 athletic training certification reform, the certification eligibility routes were
reduced from four to two. The two NATABOC ‘s 1983 certification examination routes
o f eligibility requirements were: a) graduation from an NAT A-Approved undergraduate or
graduate athletic training education program, or b) completion o f an apprenticeship
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
27
program. All candidates take the same athletic training certification examination
regardless o f the route o f certification eligibility. The change in athletic training
certification eligibility occurred to conform to professional standards in the medical
profession.
Following the NATAPEC implementation o f the athletic training major
requirements 1986, the NATABOC presented a new certification examination in January
1987. The new athletic training certification examination represented a major revision of
format and content. The NATABOC certification process is patterned after disciplines in
the medical profession (e.g., American Board o f Internal Medicine) (ABIM) certification
examination. The NATA Certification Examination has been administered by Columbia
Assessment Services (CSA) since 1987.
The National Athletic Trainer’s Association, Inc. Board o f Certification
(NATABOC) certification examination consists o f three separate sections: a written
examination, a written simulation, and a practical examination (National Athletic Trainers
Association Board of Certification, Inc., 1993). To assure that certification in athletic
training is as comprehensive as possible, the certification process includes assessment o f a
candidate’s skills in all the components o f competency the National Athletic Trainer’s
Association, Inc. Board o f Certification (1995) has determined essential. In December
1993, the NATABOC completed a second role delineation study that redefined the athletic
training profession and its cognitive knowledge and competencies. (Amheim & Prentice,
1997). The content in each section o f the certification examination is based upon on the
NATABOC Role Delineation Study o f the Entry Level Athletic Trainer (1993). Based on
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
28
this role delineation study, the universal cognitive knowledge and clinical skills
components o f the athletic training certification examination are a) prevention of athletic
injuries, b) recognition, evaluation, and immediate care of athletic injuries, c) rehabilitation
and reconditioning o f athletic injuries, d) health care administration, and e) professional
development and responsibility (Amheim & Prentice, 1997).
The three sections o f the certification examination are composed by athletic
trainers under the auspices o f the NATABOC. The certification examination questions are
validated for importance, criticality, and relevance by a group of athletic trainers separate
from the NATABOC. Following validation procedure, the acceptable questions are
psychometrically evaluated by an outside educational assessment service (CSA). The
NATABOC has statistically documented the certification examination validity and
reliability for each section (electronic mail communication, Jim Henderson, CSA Vice
President of Pm grams, December 02, 1998).
The written section of the certification examination assesses the cognitive
knowledge of entry level athletic training. It consists o f 150 five-option multiple choice
questions representative o f the performance domains identified by the NATA role
delineation study are a) prevention of athletic injuries, b) recognition, evaluation, and
immediate care o f athletic injuries, c) rehabilitation and reconditioning of athletic injuries,
d) health care administration, and e) professional development and responsibility (Amheim
& Prentice, 1997). The oral/practical section consists o f demonstration of various skills
characteristic of the clinical setting. The written simulation is a series of patient
management problems with conditions common to the athletic training clinical settings.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
29
The passage rate for each section of the athletic training certification examination
is established annually by a criterion-referenced passing point (National Athletic Trainers
Association Board o f Certification, Inc.). The criterion-referenced point establishes the
minimum passing score for each section of the certification examination. Each candidate
for the NATABOC certification examination must successfully pass all three sections
before certification as an athletic trainer may be granted. A Kuder-Richardson Formula
20 (KR-20) measures the reliability of the written examination to be at 0.88, the oral-
practical examination at .91, and .83 for the written simulation for the NATABOC
certification examination.
The medical professions (e.g., internal medicine) continually assess a candidate’s
performance on various examination formats and passage rates to guarantee professional
competence. A correlation study by Day, et al. (1990), compared the measurement of
clinical judgement with an essay exam or with multiple choice questions (MCQs). The
study (Day, et al., 1990) found that MCQs adequately measured clinical judgement. The
study (Day, et al, 1990) results showed a correlation o f .83 for the analytic scores and the
MCQs and a .76 between the global scores and MCQs. The essay examination only
identified a very minuscule unique aspect of medical competence above the traditional
MCQs. This study (Day, et al.) suggests there is a considerable overlap in the skills that
the essay and MCQs measure, and that this paradigm o f clinical judgement is highly
dependent on the individual’s medical knowledge base. The results were applicable to the
assessment in the discipline of athletic training because the NATABOC certification
examination measures similar skills and knowledge that require a specific knowledge base.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
30
Professional education programs (e.g., medicine, nursing, physical therapy, athletic
training, etc.) like to predict the outcome o f their student’s performance by means of
various admission requirements and controls on standardized examinations before taking
the licensure or certification examination. Norcini (1994) has examined the predictor
factors and has discovered additional confounding and uncontrollable factors that affect
student performance: a) performance in the professional school, b) motivation to do well
on the examination, c) interests in the content tested, and d) other differences such as of
gender, race, and ethnicity.
Norcini (1994) also identified five general issues o f performance that must be
considered for medical licensure and certification examinations. These same general issues
are applicable to athletic training performance. The five general issues are: a) Are the
findings typical? b) What is the content of the examination? c) Are the scores related to
clinical performance? d) How should the scores be used? e) Are there ongoing research
programs to follow-up the results of the licensure or certifications? These questions pose
a challenge to all assessment forms and serve as an important reminder of the value of how
research can effectively assess professional examinations for improvement.
A response to these general issues is considerable task but possible. Five years ago
research studies on performance assessment in athletic training did not exist. However, in
1999, there is evidence that educators in athletic training are doing research in predicting
student performance on the NATABOC certification examination (Keskula, Sammerone,
& Perrin, 1995; Starkey & Henderson, 1995; Harrelson, Gallaspy, Knight, & Leaver-
Dunn, 1998). For example, Keskula, Sammarone, & Perrin (1995) investigated prediction
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
31
indicators of academic achievement in an NATA-approved Graduate Athletic Training
Education Program. The predicator variables investigated included a) Graduate Record
Examination - Quantitative scores, b) Graduate Record Examination - Verbal scores, c)
preadmission grade point average, d) total athletic training clinical hours, and d)
curriculum or internship athletic training education program. The study (Keskula,
Sammarone, & Perrin, 1995) findings suggests that the variable, preadmission grade point
average, is the best predictor o f success in an NATA-approved athletic training education
program. A study by Starkey & Henderson (1995) evaluated the criteria that determine
eligibility for the NATABOC certification examination. The certification eligibility criteria
were the two routes to athletic training certification: NATA approved curriculum program
or NATA internship program. Starkey & Henderson (1995) investigated performance
differences between first time candidates according to the route o f certification eligibility.
According to the results, curriculum candidates had significantly greater scores on all
portions than did internship candidates (Starkey & Henderson, 1995). An additional study
by Harrelson, Gallaspy, Knight, & Leaver-Dunn (1998) investigated differences in learning
styles between gender and students at different education levels among undergraduate
students in a CAAHEP accredited athletic training education program. The results
suggest that students perform better in a well-lit setting in the afternoon. The answers to
the above five issues will stimulate a critical evaluation of the program’s curriculum and
clinical experience. A regular summative and formative program evaluation will allow the
faculty to assess and analyze the curriculum’s effectiveness, and accomplishments, or to
identify improvement needs for the curriculum and clinical experience.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
32
Two of the three sections (written simulation and practical) on the NATABOC
certification examination can be considered performance-based. Swanson, Norman, &
Linn (1995) states the health professions (e.g., medicine and nursing) have used
performance-base assessment methods for many decades. Since 1984, the influence of
assessment on teaching and learning has caused a movement within the health professions
and the public schools to use performance-based assessment methods. The movement to
use performance-based assessment in the health professions and the public school system
is interpreted as a powerful tool for reform policy o f the educational system at the local,
state, and national levels. For example, the National Educational Goals Panel (1991) and
National Council on Education Standards and Testing (1992) presented proposals that
identified performance-based assessment as an integral primary component of national
certification or licensure examinations.
In the allied health professions, four performance-based assessment methods are
commonly used: patient management problems (PMP), computer-based clinical
simulations, oral examinations, and standardized patients. The intent of these
performance-based assessments is to test complex, “higher order” knowledge and skill in
the practical world context in which they are actually used. These performance-base
assessments are usually open-ended tasks that require substantial time to complete
(Swanson, Norman, & Linn, 1995) and theoretically reflect the professional competency
of the practitioner. Professional competency in the medicine and related allied health
professions can be interpreted as the ability to effectively develop appropriate
“management strategies ” that resolve a problem to an acceptable outcome.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
33
The allied health professions (e.g., medicine and nursing) have learned (positive
and negative) from the development and application of performance-based assessment in
their respective disciplines. Performance-based assessment has produced many valuable
educational and assessment lessons. Assessment, despite its method, directly impacts the
curriculum, teaching methodology, and student learning. The impact of assessment is not
always predictable, and careful monitoring through appropriate studies identifies the
intended and unintended benefits (Swanson, Norman, & Linn, 1995).
Altering the assessment method of certification or licensure examinations for entry-
level into allied health professions is a powerful tool to cause/force change to the
discipline’s curriculum and instructional strategies (Messick, 1994-In Swanson, Norman,
& Linn, 1995). Swanson, Norman, & Linn (1995) has stated and it is well accepted that
“the assessment tail wags the curriculum dog” in the allied health professions, public
education, and teachers’ certification. Unfortunately, a change to a discipline’s
assessment system often produces a professional rhetoric predicting the desirable and
undesirable effects o f the “new” assessment system, but no systematic study of the
predicted impact of the changes. Allied health professions have identified cases where
systematic studies were completed, but only the intended effects were documented. It is
clear, according to athletic training literature, research studies in athletic training
evaluation, student assessment, and education methodology are limited (Kegerreis, 1980;
Ostemig, 1988). In recent years research growth in athletic training has dramatically
increased. Currently, several assessment studies (Keskula, Sammerone, & Perrin, 1995;
Starkey & Henderson, 1995; Harrelson, Gallaspy, Knight, & Leaver-Dunn, 1999)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
34
strengthen the assessment hallmark for athletic training curriculum development and
clinical instruction.
Assessment provides the statistical measurement o f educational quality and
competency to reflect the program’s quality. However, many other factors contribute to
the equation of program quality. These other factors are derived from the review of many
information sources: graduation rates, patient files, injury and summary statistics,
treatment summary and statistics, critical incident reports, client satisfaction, alumni
satisfaction, or survey of alumni employers (Ray, 1994). The impetus for curricular
change in the allied health disciplines is caused by the vast immersion of technological
knowledge, new reimbursement regulations, new athletic health problems and conditions
such as HIV/AIDS. In addition, there is an employment shift from a traditional athletic
training practice in educational institutions to the nontraditional settings of private
physical therapy clinics and outpatient hospital centers (Sheets & Anderson, 1991).
Several reports, the GPEP report in 1984 and the Proceedings of the Josiah Macy Jr.
Foundation National Seminar on Medical Education, Adapting Clinical Medical Education
to the Needs of Today and Tomorrow in 1988, proposed major curricular changes for the
medical profession (Sheets & Anderson, 1991).
Educational programs in athletic training are preparing for the implementation of a
major education policy change that represents movement toward standardization of
education requirements o f certified athletic trainers. (Delforge & Behnke, 1999). As
discussed earlier, after 1993, all athletic training education program accreditation has been
subject to CAAHEP requirements. In 1994, the NATA Education Task Force was
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
35
formed to address issues surrounding the education and professional preparation of
athletic trainers. The NATA Education Task Force made 18 recommendations for
educational change to the NATA and NATABOC in 1997. The recommendation with
significant impact states “to institute a requirement to take effect in 2004 that to be
eligible for NATABOC certification, all candidates must possess a baccalaureate degree
and have successfully completed a CAAHEP-accredited entry level athletic training
education program” (McMullan, 1996; National Athletic Trainers’ Association, 1996;
McMullan, 1997; National Athletic Trainers’ Association, 1997; National Athletic
Trainers’ Association Education Task Force, 1997). This policy change would eliminate
the NATABOC internship route to athletic trainer certification. It means that CAAHEP
Accredited athletic training education programs will be the only route to athletic trainer
certification. To confirm the specialized body of
knowledge in athletic training further, the NATABOC will conduct its third role
delineation study in 1999.
Education Resources
Educational resources for an athletic training education program are related to the
total institutional resources available and acquired by its academic unit (Hackman, 1991).
These educational resources affecting instruction are personnel, financial, and physical.
Educational resource allocation to an academic unit is determined by the unit leader based
on the unit’s need and level of contribution to the mission of the educational institution
(Hackman, 1991). A request for educational resources is assessed carefully before the
educational institution makes a permanent commitment to an academic unit, program, or
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
36
personnel. Careful assessment of a need for educational resources focuses on the a) total
needs of the institution, b) needs of the college/school, c) needs of the academic unit, d)
existing academic faculty/personnel e) practicality and feasibility of the unit’s budget
(Whalen, 1991; Hackman, 1991; Odden&Picus, 1992).
Financial, physical, and personnel resources for athletic training education
programs are compared to and prioritized with the other disciplines needs within the
academic unit. Recent NATA education and certification policy adoptions (National
Athletic Trainers Education Task Force, 1997) will affect how CAAHEP accredited
athletic training education programs will provide academic and clinical instruction. The
policy changes will affect personnel resources o f the athletic training education program.
The Essentials and Guidelines for an accredited educational program for the athletic
trainer state “There shall be sufficient faculty to provide students with adequate attention,
instruction, and supervised practice to acquire the knowledge and competence needed for
entry into the occupation” (Committee on Allied Health Education and Accreditation,
1992). However, the essentials and guidelines do not specify the minimum number of full
time teaching faculty in the academic unit for athletic training to meet accreditation
requirements nor do they specify any mmimutns for clinical instruction. Previously the
NATAPEC approval process had mandated a student-to-certified athletic trainer ratio o f
8:1 in clinical education. Athletic training education programs under CAAHEP
accreditation and the JRC-AT find the student-to-certified athletic trainer ratio has been
eliminated. The CAAHEP program may use any student-to-certified athletic trainer ratio
with the documentation of outcomes from the clinical experience.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
37
CAAHEP recognizes the program director as the primary administrator for
academic and clinical instruction. Beyond the CAAHEP essential’s requirement o f
“sufficient faculty” it is quiet on faculty numbers. A survey by Mathies, Denegar, &
Amhold (1995) states athletic training faculty and staff are small, usually three to five
individuals. Theoretically, it reflects a program director on a full time academic
appointment and two to four staff athletic trainers on full time employment in athletics.
The question naturally emerges since the program director is usually the only athletic
training faculty on full time appointment: Are
the expectations for academia and athletic training program administration creating an
unrealistic work load for the program director?
The literature in higher education is quiet about the “minimum number” o f faculty
required to sustain an academic expertise or discipline within an academic unit. Since the
literature is quiet, the decision concerning “minimum number” of faculty is seen to the
responsibility to the educational institution and academic unit. However, limited opinion
in higher education environments does exist regarding instruction by full time faculty. The
State of California Legislature passed AB 1725, Chapter 973, Statutes of 1988 to change
the trend of faculty employment in the California Community College Districts. The
California Community College Districts were hiring more part time faculty than full time
faculty to teach in the campus’s core instructional programs. With this hiring practice,
California Community College Districts could lower personnel cost for instructional
programs. However, the Legislature felt full time faculty would be more accessible and
possess more teaching expertise than part time faculty.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
38
AB 1725, Chapter 973, Statutes o f 1988 requires 75% of the hours o f credit
instruction at the California Community College to be taught by full time faculty. This
statute has been in effect 10 years, and no California Community College has complied.
AB 420 is a California community college initiative under consideration during the 1999-
2000 regular session of the California Legislature.
AB 420 links part time faculty compensation at a salary proportional to the salary
of a full time faculty with comparable training and experience (A.B. 420, California
Legislature, 1999-2000 Regular Session, 1999). In addition, it also establishes re
employment rights for a part time faculty.
The most definitive statement on faculty numbers required in expertise areas was
suggested in the report entitled External Program Review for Department of Kinesiology
and Physical Education at California State University, Long Beach (Higgins, March 02,
1998). The report clearly stated that the Department must “concentrate all future tenure
track positions in specialized expertise areas that have one faculty member” (Higgins,
March 02, 1998). The additional faculty member would provide depth, consistency,
continuity, and stability to specialized. As a result, the work load is more equally
distributed, collaboration among the faculty occurs, and scholarly activity increases.
Organizational Culture and Structure
Organizational culture and structure parallel each other in the work environment.
Culture has been defined as “the integrated pattern o f human behavior that includes
thought, speech, action, and artifacts and depends on man’s capacity for learning and
transmitting knowledge to succeeding generations” (Deal & Kennedy, 1982a).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
39
Organizational culture is its heroes, values, networks, behavior, and beliefs (Deal &
Kennedy, 1982b; Ray, 1994). Organizational culture defines what it means to work in
that environment (e.g., an athletic trainer works for a professional team as compared with
a high school). The organizational culture also influences loyalty and commitment an
employee has to the program and the institution (e.g., the USC spirit).
Different models of organizational culture and governance exist. The more
common organizational models are the bureaucratic network, collegial system, political
activity, personalistic culture, and formalistic culture (Deal & Kennedy, 1982b; Ray,
1994). The three organizational models common to athletic training environments are
collegial, personalistic, and formalistic.
A collegial system of organizational culture and structure is characterized by
consensus, teamwork, and collaboration in decision making and problem solving
(Baldridge, Curtis, Ecker, & Riley, 1991; Ray, 1994). This model works in education
environments where a few individuals would be involved in the decision making and
problem solving process. Although the collegial model seems ideal, it has three dominant
weaknesses. The first, a decision making process at the higher level of the organization
may employ a different environment that recognizes the collegial model but limits the
actual power to make collegial decisions. A second weakness is the inability to make fast
decisions since a group consensus is required. The third weakness is the problem of
dealing with conflict. Conflict is not easily resolved in the collegial model since
philosophical and opinion battles occur before reaching a consensus decision. Sometimes
the consensus could also represent the “victory” of one group over another.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
40
Personalistic organizational culture and structure are characterized by
individualism and autonomy in decision making process (Ray, 1994). Policy, procedures,
or any central controls are virtually nonexistent in this environment. This model also
represents a form of “controlled” or “organized” anarchy (Baldridge, Curtis, Ecker, &
Riley, 1991). In contrast to the collegial model, decisions by consensus, teamwork, or
collaboration are extremely rare. Each member of the program/department works
independently and therefore any problem is “their” problem not that of the
program/department.
The Formalistic culture is similar to the bureaucratic model. It has a formal
hierarchy, formal channels of communication, policies and rules, and lines of authority
(Baldridge, Curtis, Ecker, & Riley, 1991). Decision making and problem solving is done
routinely by the appropriate personnel. (Baldridge, Curtis, Ecker, & Riley, 1991; Ray,
1994). This model works well in environments were there are large staffs. It allows
decisions to be made quickly, provides direction for the staff, quality of service is constant,
and responsibilities are defined. The formalistic model seems inflexible as reflected by four
weaknesses. The first is that decision making follows the line o f authority with very little
regard to opinion from the outside the authority line. A second weakness is that the while
the line of authority for decision making is described, the dynamic process of decision is
not. The third weakness is that the structure is described as the present but the line of
authority changes over time. The fourth weakness is the explanation of policies will be
carried out but not how the policy was established.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
41
An organization’s structure defines the relationship between each member of the
program/department (Ray, 1994). Athletic training clinical programs can develop an
organizational structure based on three models: function-oriented, service-oriented, and
the matrix. The function-oriented organizational chart would seem to be useful in
traditional athletic training settings. Historically this model emphasizes distributing
responsibilities, duties, and assignments according to skills, expertise, and knowledge.
The function-oriented chart does not permit a quick decision, promotes poor
accountability, and allows no professional collaboration.
The second organizational chart, service-oriented, organizes the athletic training
setting according to the type of services provided by the staff. Positive features include
definitive staff responsibilities and accountability. However, the service-oriented chart has
several negative features including political conflicts among work groups, excessive
personnel and supervisory costs, and no collaboration between work groups.
The third organizational chart is called the matrix. Its components are the
strengths o f the function-oriented and the service-oriented (i.e. physical therapy
department in hospitals). The matrix model would seem to be the best approach to an
organization structure in the traditional athletic training setting. This model permits
collaboration and flexibility for efficient use o f the strengths of members o f the work
group to provide service and accomplish projects. A pure function-oriented or service-
oriented organizational chart would not allow the athletic training program to be efficient.
Its rigid line of authority, responsibilities, and duties would not maximize the skills and
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
42
knowledge o f the entire work group. However the matrix model requires interpersonal
communication and rapport among colleagues, which might not always be present.
One additional aspect of organizational culture and structure is the supervision of
the student athletic trainer’s clinical activities in the athletic training setting. Supervision is
the act o f direction and critical evaluation o f a student’s performance by the line of
authority. The student’s immediate line o f authority in the athletic training clinical setting
would be the clinical instructor. The clinical instructor assesses the student’s clinical
activities to improve performance or professional development. Tanner and Tanner
(1987) described three supervisory models that would be appropriate in the athletic
training setting: inspection-production, clinical, and developmental.
The inspection-production model o f supervision features a formalistic line of
authority with emphasis on the program’s competencies, policies , and procedures. A
main feature o f this model requires the educational athletic training program to develop a
list of comprehensive goals the student athletic trainer will achieve during the clinical
experience. A positive benefit o f this model is that it defines the limits o f the clinical
experience and the student athletic trainer’s understand the program’s expectations. The
inspection-production model has several disadvantages. One, the inspection-production
model has been used in industrial settings where the outcomes can be measured easily.
Outcomes are not always easily measurable in a an athletic training setting. A second
disadvantage is that the model does not work well in a service-oriented organizational
culture and structure because it is based on achievement of the established program goals.
Due to the variety o f different student athletic trainer experiences in the clinical setting, the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
43
actual attainment of the goals are difficult to interpret. The third disadvantage is that
performance feedback is often viewed as being negative criticism and not constructive
criticism.
A second supervisory model is clinical supervision. The clinical supervision model
involves the direct observation of the student athletic trainer with suggestions to correct
deficiencies in performance (Ray, 1994). The clinical supervisory model requires to the
supervisor to analyze the strengths and weaknesses o f the performance and then develop a
collaboratively, a plan o f to improve the weaknesses. An advantage of the clinical
supervision model is that it encourages a collegial environment within the clinical setting.
A disadvantage is the amount of observed time required to evaluate the student athletic
trainer’s performance effectively. Additionally, the evaluation’s effectiveness would also
depend on the supervisor’s evaluation and interpretation skills. It seems the clinical
supervision model would work well in the traditional athletic training setting.
The third supervision model is developmental supervision. Developmental
supervision requires the supervising athletic training clinical instructor to develop mutually
agreed upon goals with the student athletic trainer. A major goal of this model is
collegiality and collaboration with emphasis on goal development for the program’s
growth and student athletic trainer’s personal growth. However, collegiality and
collaboration take time to accomplish, which maybe a disadvantage for this supervisory
model.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
44
CHAPTER m
Method
The administrative features o f the CAAHEP accredited athletic training programs
and their success rate on the certification examination were assessed by means o f a
descriptive survey. The perceived importance o f these administrative features for
successful accreditation and for success on the certification examination was further
explored through case study interviews. The present chapter reports on the samples,
instruments and procedures employed for the descriptive survey and for the case study
interviews.
Survey
Survey Instrument
The investigator developed a survey instrument (see Appendix C ) to obtain
information regarding the administrative and/or governance features of the CAAHEP
accredited programs. Question development was guided by a review of the
administrative/governance structures commonly found in academic and allied health
programs and by the CAAHEP document regarding the “Essentials and Guidelines” for an
accredited athletic training education program. The survey was divided into three sections.
The first section asked about the complexity, breadth, depth and type of program
administrative structure. Questions sought specific information about the program’s:
a) management structure, b) organisational culture, c) the number and status of
participating faculty, d) faculty roles and responsibilities and e) relationships between the
athletic training faculty and the athletic personnel.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
45
A second section o f the survey contained questions about the demographical
characteristics o f the program’s environment, its home department and the university (Le.,
size, age, etc.). Also included were questions regarding the student population. The third
and final section o f questions was devoted to gathering information regarding success on
the NATABOC Certification Exam. The information requested included each programs
overall passage rate in 1997 and 1998 as well as the passage rate for each of the
examination’s component parts: written, practical and simulation. All programs receive
this information from the NATABOC if they have five or more students taking the
national examination that year.
In all, the survey consisted o f 41 questions divided into the three sections:
a) administrative features, b) demographics, and c) certification exam results. The survey
was tested for content validity by consulting with six experts in athletic training and
related allied health fields familiar with professional program accreditation (e.g., athletic
training, kinesiotherapy, physical therapy, etc.). A preliminary telephone survey was
conducted to ensure the relevance and clarity o f the instrument with professionals in
athletic training and related allied health fields familiar with professional program
accreditation (e.g., athletic training, kinesiotherapy, physical therapy, etc.). Based on the
data, several minor modifications were made to the instrument.
Survey Sample
The descriptive survey instrument was sent to all 91 program directors of
CAAHEP accredited university undergraduate athletic training education programs in the
United States in March of 1999. Each participant’s mailing address and electronic mail
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
46
(e-mail) address was obtained from the web page (http://www.nata.org) o f the National
Athletic Trainers’ Association, Inc. for accredited CAAHEP athletic training education
programs (See Appendix D for list of institutions).
Survey Administrative Procedure
Each participant was sent a survey packet that consisted of the following: mailing
envelope, cover letter, survey, return envelope, and reply post card. A one page cover
letter (See Appendix E) was developed that described the investigator, purpose of the
study and its methodology, and requested their participation in the survey. The cover
letter was printed on department letterhead of the investigator’s educational place of
employment.
The descriptive survey was printed on white paper. Each category (Administrative
Structure, Demographical Data, and Certification Data) o f the survey began on a new
page but the questions within each category were printed back to back producing a total
of seven pages of questions on five sheets of paper. A self addressed and stamped
standard white business envelope was provided for return o f the survey by each
participant.
The descriptive survey did not contain or request any faculty or institutional
identifying information. It was felt that asking for identifying information might limit the
willingness to respond to sensitive questions particularly those regarding performance on
the certification exam. To maintain confidentiality and yet be able to follow up on non-
respondents, participants were asked to return a provided post card separate from the
survey instrument. The post card did identify the institution and so it was possible to track
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
47
and resend surveys to non-respondents and still assure confidentiality. A standard white
post card, self-addressed, stamped and printed with the institution’s name on the back
side, was used for this purpose.
A deadline (ten days after the initial mailing) to return the completed survey was
established and stated in the cover letter. Two methods of follow up to non-respondents
were used: (a) an electronic mail message (e-mail), and (b) an additional survey packet.
The first follow-up procedure was an e-mail message reminder (See Appendix F for
sample e-mail message) sent to all the survey non-respondents requesting them to
complete and return the survey by a specific date. The final follow-up (See Appendix G
for follow-up cover letter) consisted of mailing a complete second packet of the initial
survey to all the non-respondents. A deadline (ten days after the mailing) to return the
completed second survey was established and stated in the cover letter.
Case Study
Case Study Instrument
Interviews were employed to further assess the importance and value placed on
administrative factors by program directors, departmental chairs, and athletic trainers.
There was particular interest in examining how the various administrative features of the
program were seen to influence not only the certification examination outcome but also
the decision to undergo the CAAHEP accreditation process. The previously mentioned
review of the administrative/governance structure of academic and allied health education
programs along with the CAAHEP Essentials and Guidelines for an accredited athletic
training education program again served as background for the development o f interview
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
48
topic questions. In addition, the former guidelines for NATAPEC “approved” curriculum
programs and the former guidelines for NATA internship programs were studied to
ascertain any major differences in administrative requirements.
As for the survey instrument, the interview process explored the characteristics,
complexity, breadth and depth o f the administrative/governance structure. Emphasis,
however, was on the participant’s perception of the role and importance of these
administrative features for successful accreditation and for a successful program outcome
on the certification examination. A copy o f the topic questions that guided the interviews
is located in Appendix B. The relevance of the topic questions were tested by consulting
with experts (program directors and experts in athletic training, kinesiotherapy, and
physical therapy) in athletic training and related allied health fields.
Case Study Sample
Purposeful sampling was employed to select the participants for the case study
interviews. The interview process was restricted to Universities in California. Prospective
participants were those California athletic training programs that had been previously
“approved” by the NATAPEC in 1993. Five universities in California fulfilled this
requirement. The academic status o f these five programs was investigated to discover if
the program had converted to a CAAHEP based program or reverted to an NATA
internship based program in 1994. In March of 1999, three o f these five programs were
CAAHEP accredited and two have reverted to the NATA internship status.
One university o f the CAAHEP accredited programs and one o f the NATA
internship/service programs were selected. The final selection was made based on
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
49
geographical location, the program, and the administrative structure before CAAHEP
accreditation or before reverting to an internship program. The program selection was
determined according to academic personnel structure o f the athletic training education
program in the academic unit. For example, the program director position of the selected
CAAHEP athletic training education program had existed in the academic unit for
approximately ten years at the time the institution moved forward with CAAHEP
accreditation- This model represented the accreditation expectations o f CAAHEP. The
internship athletic training education program was also selected based on its administrative
model at the time it reverted from an NATAPEC approved program to an NATA
internship program. The program director position of the selected internship athletic
training education program existed in Athletics department and had never existed in the
academic unit. This was a direct contrast to CAAHEP accreditation structure for
academic personnel. Since the examination o f administrative differences between a
CAAHEP accredited program and a NATA internship program was related to the research
questions o f this study, the selection was a natural.
Case Study - Interview Procedure
A series o f formal interviews, based on the topic questions, was conducted at each
chosen institution. Interviewees consisted o f the program director, head athletic trainer
and department chair. The program director and department chair were selected because
of the role administrators of departments and programs play in decision-making process to
pursue athletic training program accreditation. In addition, the head athletic trainer was
selected because o f the essential interaction that must occur between the program director
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
50
and the head athletic trainer regarding the linkage and integration of didactic and clinical
experiences.
Interviews were scheduled for 60-90 minutes but were flexible depending upon the
information available. It is important to realize that many of the topics were covered in an
interactive manner and so it was not necessary to pose all questions to all participants.
Each interview was conducted by the investigator and recorded on audio tape.
Each audio recorded interview was transcribed as text and formatted as a
computer data file. The computer data file was manipulated by a software program
designed to do interpretational analyzes. A number was assigned to each line o f text in
the database by the software program for interpretational analyzes. The investigator
divided the text into meaningful segments. Each text segment contains one item of
information that was understandable outside the original context. The text segment
varied in length: a phrase within a sentence, a sentence, a paragraph, or several pages. A
text segment was identified by indicating the line number it begins on and ends on. Single
or multiple codes were assigned to individual text segments from the set of categories that
consist of and describe the interview data.
The coded categories were developed according the CAAHEP Essentials and
Guidelines. Coded categories include: institution support/sponsorship, resources
(subcategories: personnel, financial, and physical), students (subcategories: admission,
evaluation, health, and guidance), operational policies (subcategories: fair practice and
student records), and program evaluation. The NUD*IST qualitative software program
was used for categorizing and analyzing the interview data.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
51
Analysis
Frequencies were computed for each survey question. Where necessary, separate
frequencies were computed that were conditioned upon the answers to related questions
and/or cross tabulations were performed.
Correlations (Pearson-product moment family) were used to identify significant
relationships between administrative or demographic variables and performance on the
certification examination. One way analysis o f variance (ANOVAs) were performed to
detect mean differences in performance level for given values o f categorical variables and
a multiple regression analysis served to identify combined predictors of certification
performance.
The case interviews were coded for each of the categories seen in Appendix H.
The Politics category and its subcategories was added after the interviews were
conducted. Inspection indicated that such a category was an essential part of the decision
making process. For each research question, pertinent categories were searched via the
NU*DIST software program In this manner, all instances from each interview that were
related to that question could be assembled together and cross-referenced and reviewed.
Pertinent keyword searches were also employed to further explore factors of interest.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
52
CHAPTER IV
Results
The present chapter reports the findings o f the 41 survey questions and the
perceptions of the case study interviews. The findings are presented according to the
research questions.
Participant Description
Survey
The survey participants were all 91 program directors of CAAHEP accredited
university undergraduate athletic training education programs in the United States as o f
March of 1999 and were identified by the web page o f the NATA, Inc.
(http:Wwww.nata.org). Forty states of the 50 states in the United States are represented
by the 91 CAAHEP accredited undergraduate athletic training education programs. The
CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs are clustered within the states
as follows: twenty-one states have one program, five states have two programs, six states
have three programs, three states have four programs, one state has five programs, one
state has six programs, and one state has 12 programs. The education level of the
program directors o f the CAAHEP accredited university undergraduate athletic training
education programs is represented by the following: (a) 39.56% possess a doctorate
degree, (b) 57.14% have a Masters degree, (c) 3.30% possess a Bachelors degree.
The initial survey mailing returned 47.25% (43) responses of a possible 91. The
electronic mail reminder produced 2.20% (2) additional surveys and 4.40% (4) requests
for additional copies from non-responders stating they had not received the survey. The
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
53
second survey mailing produced 9.89% (9) additional surveys. Of a possible 91
participants, 57.14% (52) o f the surveys were returned but 60.44% (55) returned post
cards. A discrepancy o f 3.30% existed between the number o f returned post cards
compared to returned surveys. The discrepancy between post cards and surveys can
perhaps be attributed to three institutions declining to participate and returning the post
card to avoid further participation requests.
Of the possible 40 states possessing CAAHEP accredited undergraduate athletic
training education programs, 62.5% of the states are represented by the returned surveys.
A comparison of non-retumed surveys shows 39.56% did not respond and 3.30% declined
to participate in the study. The surveys returned are geographically representative
(57.14%) o f the CAAHEP accredited athletic training education programs in the United
States. The investigator tallied the returned surveys according to each state and then
plotted each state on a United States map to illustrate geographical representation (See
Appendix I). CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs in the East and
Midwest regions o f the United States are more than adequately represented, but the West
region has sparse representation. However, the case study interviews were conducted in
another state of the West region, thus increasing the region’s representation.
Case Study
The case study interviews were conducted at two higher education institutions
with undergraduate athletic training education programs One institution’s athletic
training education program was CAAHEP accredited. The other institution’s athletic
training education program was internship/service based.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
54
The CAAHEP accredited undergraduate athletic training education program
participant was an urban university founded in the last 50 years by the Legislature. The
University currently has 27,086 students of which 57% are female. Campus-wide
instruction is provided by 795 full time instructional faculty o f which 68% are full
professors, 17% are associate professors, and 14% are assistant professors. The
CAAHEP accredited athletic training education program is housed the Department of
Kinesiology in the College of Health and Human Development. The Division of
Kinesiology offers a Bachelor of Science degree in Kinesiology with a choice from five
option areas.
Review of appropriate documents indicated the CAAHEP accredited athletic
training education program had been previously approved by the NATAPEC. The
program received initial CAAHEP accreditation approval approximately three years ago.
Its current academic and clinical operational policies reflect the essentials, guidelines and
standards o f CAAHEP. The program is currently completing the CAAHEP self-study in
preparation to submit application to the JRT-AT for continued CAAHEP accreditation.
The education level of the CAAHEP undergraduate athletic training education
program participant is represented by the following: a) the program director has an Ed.D.,
b) the head athletic trainer has a Masters degree, and is in the second year of a doctoral
program, and c) the department chair has a Ph.D.. The head athletic trainer participated in
the case study interview. The program director and department chair declined to
participate in the case study interviews.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
55
The Department Chair of the home department of the CAAHEP accredited athletic
training education program is a new chair serving as the “acting chair” for the Department
until formal appointment in August 1999. The “acting chair” declined to be interviewed
stating “unfamiliarity” with the CAAHEP accreditation requirements for the athletic
training education. Further more, issues related to any accreditation is the responsibility of
the discipline’s faculty to communicate and consult with the department chair. The
investigator attempted to contact the previous chair and learned the “previous chair” had
chosen to participate in a faculty early retirement plan at the end o f the academic year.
Further contacts were made to reach the prior chair who had been involved in the decision
making process to seek CAAHEP accreditation for their athletic training education
program. The former chair is currently a Dean in the College of Health and Human
Development. The Dean was not available for the interview.
The Program Director of the CAAHEP accredited athletic training education
program declined to participate in the interview due to being unable to contribute. The
Program Director took over for the former program director after the Department’s made
the decision to pursue CAAHEP accreditation. The investigator attempted to contact the
“participant’s” former program director o f the athletic training education, but was
unsuccessful. The former program director is a faculty member and researcher at a
university in the Midwest region o f the United States.
The internship/service based undergraduate athletic training education program
participant is also an urban university founded within the past 50 years by the Legislature.
The University currently has 25,550 students o f which 58% are female. Campus
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
56
instruction is provided by 660 full time instructional faculty of which 86% have
doctorates. Ninety-eight percent o f the campus tenured/tenure track faculty have
doctorates or equivalent. The internship athletic training education program is housed the
Division o f Kinesiology and Health Promotions in the School of Human Development.
The Division o f Kinesiology offers a Bachelor o f Science degree in Kinesiology with a
choice from eight focus areas and two minors.
Review o f appropriate documents indicated the education program had been
previously approved by the NAT APEC and reverted to an internship program
approximately four years ago. Since reverting to an internship program, the athletic
training education program has chosen to undergo curriculum and faculty reform. The
program is currently completing the CAAHEP self-study in preparation to submit
application to the JRT-AT for CAAHEP accreditation.
The education level of the interviewee’s o f the internship undergraduate athletic
training education program participant is represented by the following: a) the program
director has a Ph.D., b) the head athletic trainer has a Masters degree, and c) the
department chair has Ph.D.. The program director, head athletic, and department chair
participated in the case study interviews.
Findings
Research Question 1: What are the contextual and environmental characteristics of
CAAHEP accredited athletic training education programs and in what way do such
characteristics influence obtaining or maintaining CAAHEP accreditation?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
57
Table 1
Summary of Academic Department Home of CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education
Proerams (N=52)
Frequency of Percentage of
College/School Institutions Institutions
Education and Human Services 5 9.62
Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Teacher Education 1 1.92
Integrated Science and Technology 1 1.92
Education 12 23.07
Arts and Science 4 7.69
Professional Studies 1 1.92
Science and Health 1 1.92
Allied Health and Nursing 2 3.84
Health Professions 1 1.92
Social Sciences 1 1.92
Science and Math 1 1.92
Physical Education and Recreation 1 1.92
Physical Education 1 1.92
Health and Rehabilitation Sciences 1 1.92
Health and Human Services 3 5.77
Human Performance and Health Sciences 3 5.77
Sciences and Humanities 1 1.92
Health and Human Performance 2 3.84
Applied Sciences and Technology 1 1.92
Liberal Arts 2 3.84
Human Environmental Sciences 1 1.92
Applied Life Studies 1 1.92
Health Science 1 1.92
Natural Science 2 3.84
No Response 2 3.84
University Setting
The average campus student population o f all reporting CAAHEP accredited
Athletic Training Education Programs (N=52) was 12,619 (SD = 10,130.73). The
distribution is positively skewed and the median, 9,300, is more representative of the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
58
campus student populations. Institution age was reported by 50 universities with an age
range o f 27 to 167 years old. The mean age o f the Universities is 114.0 (SD = 33.49)
years old with 80% reporting a University age range o f 100 to 167 years.
Academic Home
The programs reported a total frequency o f 24 Academic Homes, of which, the
College o f Education (23.07%) was the most common (See Table 1). A collapsed
summary (See Table 2) of the diversified Department names indicates the Department of
Kinesiology/Physical Education/Exercise Science (38.46 %) was the most common home
for CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs.
Table 2
Collapsed Summary of Academic Home of CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education
Programs (N=48)
Frequency of Percentage of
Department Institutions Institutions
Health, Physical Education, and Recreation 8 15.38
Health Science 3 5.77
Kinesiology/Physical Education/Exercise Science 20 38.46
Health Science and Sport Studies 3 5.77
Health, Physical Education, and Sport Studies 2 3.85
Sports Medicine and Exercise Science 2 3.85
Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance 1 1.92
Education 2 3.85
Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance 1 1.92
Physical Therapy 1 1.92
Athletic Training 2 3.85
Kinesiology and Leisure Studies 2 3.85
Health and Leisure 1 1.92
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
59
Table 3 reports the line o f authority findings. Approximately 90.38 % of
CAAHEP Program Directors report only to the Department Chair.
Table 3
fN=52f
Frequency of Percentage of
Chain of Command Institutions Institutions
Department Chair 47 90.38
Dean 4 7.69
Department Chair and Athletic Director 1 1.92
Table 4 summarizes the data for areas of specialization, total department faculty,
and total department majors in the department that is home to the CAAHEP Accredited
Athletic Training Education Program. The Departments offer 4.0 (median) undergraduate
specializations and 2.0 (median) undergraduate degrees. The median number o f full time
faculty in the Department is 13. Total undergraduate majors in the Department represent
a range of 40 to 1200, a mean o f 347.4, and a median o f250.
Table 4
Summary of Academic Department Home Characteristics of the CAAHEP Accredited Athletic
Training Education Program
Characteristic # Responding
M
SD Mdn
Degrees Offered 45 2.6 2.94 2.0
Areas of Specialization 44 4.8 3.66 4.0
Total Department Faculty 50 17.7 15.67 13.0
Total Department Majors 43 347.4 266.44 250.0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
60
Athletic Training Education Program and Student Characteristics
The year for initial approval o f a CAAHEP accredited athletic training education
program ranged from 1993 to 1999 with a median year o f 1996. Approximately 77 % of
the CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs had been NATAPEC
approved since 1979 (median) prior to the CAAHEP accreditation. One hundred percent
o f the CAAHEP programs utilized admission criteria. Table 5 summarizes the seven
admission criteria for the athletic training education program.
Table 5
Characteristic Summary of CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs (N=52)
Characteristic % of Programs
Program Admission. Criteria
Application 98
Personal Interview 87
Observation Experience 85
Active Participation Experience 40
Cumulative GPA 98
GPA in Specific Major Courses 83
Letters of Recommendation 8 1
Gender
Female 57.1
Male 42.9
Greater than 80% of the CAAHEP programs consistently used six of the seven listed
admission criteria. The admission criteria of active participation experience was not used
by approximately 60% of the CAAHEP programs The Department Home of 32.7 %
(17) of the CAAHEP programs had a department requirement that its majors must
maintain a minimum grade point average o f 2.5 (median) in all major course work. The
student size o f the CAAHEP athletic training education programs is 31.50 (median)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
61
athletic training majors. There are more females enrolled in CAAHEP athletic training
education programs than males. Table 5 describes the gender distribution.
State Regulation
Three types of athletic training regulation exists in 86.5 % of the CAAEHP
Accredited athletic training education programs. Table 6 shows the breakdown and types
o f regulation.
Table 6
Regulation Summary of CAAHEP Approved Athletic Training Education Programs 01=521
Frequency of
Institutions
Percent of
Institutions
State Regulation
Implemented 45 86.5
Non-existent 7 13.5
Type of regulation
Licensure 30 57.7
Certification 10 19.2
Registration 5 9.6
Program Relationships with Community Allied Health Personnel
An advisory group comprised of allied health professionals from within the community
exists in approximately 32% o f the CAAHEP Athletic Training Education Programs.
Case Study Perceptions
The case study participants are housed in similar home department titles, such as
Department of Kinesiology with slight variations according to Department faculty
preference. Each Department is housed in a health-based college. The Department home
in CAAHEP approved institutions is housed more often in the College of Education.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
62
Degree offerings by the case study participants were similar to the CAAHEP accredited
athletic training programs. Each case study program has established program admission
criteria that are consistent with CAAHEP accredited athletic training education programs.
Both case study participants stated their student enrollment in the athletic training
program is dependent on students transferring from the community college. It is very rare
to have a freshman begin the athletic training education program.
The number of majors in the CAAHEP accredited athletic training education
program is twice that o f the internship program with the majority in each program being
female. Future increase in major enrollments in each athletic training education program
appear to be related to the number of academic faculty and clinical education sites. For
example, both types of athletic training education programs recognize the need for
program growth to justify course enrollments. The academic department of both athletic
training education programs monitor class size. Classes with low enrollments are not cost
effective and are usually canceled. To compensate for class low enrollments, two
solutions are presented: a) students from related allied health disciplines (i.e. pre-physical
therapy) are encouraged by the academic department to take athletic training courses, and
b) increase the number o f students in the program. However, the CAAHEP accredited
athletic training education program and the NATA internship program consider enrollment
growth impossible without adequate athletic training faculty in the academic unit. Each
program considers the lack o f “sufficient faculty” as a potential obstacle to CAAHEP
accreditation. In some cases, the perception of major enrollment in the athletic training
education program in the academic department varies. For example, the internship athletic
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
63
training faculty are recruiting new students and developing off campus clinical site
agreements in anticipation o f major enrollment increases in the athletic training education
program. In contrast, the internship’s Department Chair does not share the same student
enrollment perception. The Department Chair’s perception is that the athletic training
education program will have a fixed cap o f twenty students. Both programs state the
“athletic training majors are the brightest in the department” and “receive recognition for
academic achievements.”
Research Question 2: What is the nature o f the administrative structure o f
CAAHEP accredited athletic training education programs and how is this structure seen to
impact the accreditation process?
Management Structure
Table 7 summarizes the leadership personnel in the administrative structure o f the
athletic training education programs. All CAAHEP athletic training education programs
in the sample (N = 52) have a program director. In addition, three programs have a
different individual serving as coordinator o f academic education, and 16 programs have a
different individual serving as coordinator o f clinical education.
The responsibility structure of the program director for the CAAHEP accredited
athletic education program is described in Table 7. In addition to overall program
responsibilities as Program Director, 30.8 % (n = 16) have additional responsibility for
coordination of academic education only, 5.8% (n = 3) have additional responsibility for
coordination of clinical education only, 63.5% (n = 33) have additional responsibility for
both the coordination o f the academic education and clinical education.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table 7
Structure Summary of CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs
64
Structure
Frequency of
Institutions
Percent of
Institutions
Personnel/Leadership
Program Director 52 100
Coordinator of Academic Education 3 5.8
Coordinator of Clinical Education 16 30.8
Program Director Responsibility
Program Director Only 0 0
Program Director and Coordinator
of Academic Education 16 30.8
Program Director and Coordinator
of Clinical Education 3 5.8
Program Director and Coordinator of
Academic and Clinical Education 33 63.5
Organizational Culture and Structure
The collegial organizational culture was the most common (76.9 %) in CAAHEP
athletic training education programs. Additional cultures were described by the CAAHEP
programs. The formalistic culture was characterized by 13.5% of the programs, 5.8%
depicted a personalistic culture, and 3.8% reported a hybrid model of the collegial and
formalistic culture.
The most common organizational chart structure in CAAHEP athletic training
education programs was the matrix-oriented chart (80.8 %). The matrix-oriented
organizational chart divides the work load among colleagues according to expertise and/or
according to the type of work/services being provided. As noted in Chapter n it combines
the strength features of the function-oriented and service-oriented organizational chart
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
65
structures. In the CAAHEP programs, the function-oriented chart and the service-oriented
chart characterized 9.6% o f the programs.
Academic Faculty
Table 8 summarizes the faculty o f the CAAHEP approved athletic training
education programs. The mean o f 4.5 represents the average total number o f full and part
time athletic training faculty on academic appointment in CAAHEP accredited athletic
training education programs. The mean number of athletic training faculty on a full time
appointment in the academic department is 2.1. Of the athletic training faculty on a full
time academic appointment only .9 (mean) are tenured, and another .8 (mean) are on a
tenure track position. Approximately 67% of the CAAHEP program directors are on a full
time tenured/tenure track position.
Table 8
Summary of Athletic Training Faculty of CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education
Programs
Academic Faculty
M
SD
Total Faculty 4.5 1.70
Full Time Academic Appointment 2.1 1.35
Tenured .9 .86
Tenure Track .8 .97
Lecturer 1.6 1.84
Relationship of Athletic Training Faculty and Athletic Personnel
On the average 51 % of the full time academic athletic training faculty do have a
clinical assignment in Athletics. The portion o f the academic work load and
responsibilities related to the clinical assignment in athletics for full time academic athletic
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
66
training faculty is 42.57% (mean). The clinical responsibility is divided into two segments:
student supervision and athletic health care. The mean average for student supervision is
49.4% and the average mean for athletic health care duties is 47.14%. See Table 9 for
summary.
Table 9
Summary of Role and Responsibilities of Athletic Training Faculty of CAAHEP Accredited
Athletic Training Education Programs (N=S1)
Role and Responsibility
M (%)
Academic with Clinical Assignment 50.60
Clinical Percent of Academic Appointment 42.57
Type of Clinical Assignment
Student Supervision 49.41
Athletic Health Care 47.14
On the average, intercollegiate Athletics employs 2.9 athletic trainers foil time and
1.4 athletic trainers part time. Most o f these athletic trainers (78.4%) in intercollegiate
athletics do have a responsibility to teach in the CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training
Education Program. In 60% of the CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education
Programs the athletic trainer in athletics does not teach as part of their intercollegiate
athletics work load but does so as part o f an academic appointment in athletic training. In
the 40% of the CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs where
teaching is part o f their athletics duties it accounts for 27.6% of their intercollegiate
athletics work. In seven (13.5%, N=51) o f the sample CAAHEP Accredited Athletic
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
67
Training Education Programs, the athletic trainers in intercollegiate athletics do not have
teaching responsibilities. See Table 10 for summary.
Table 10
Summary of Athletic Trainers in Athletics of CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education
Programs
Athletic Trainers_____________________M__________________Sf)_______________________
Full Time 2.9 2.31
Part Time 1.4 1.69
Teaching Portion of Workload (%) 27.6 16.89
Clinical and Academic Activities
Approximately 60% o f the CAAHEP accredited athletic training education
programs have a vision statement. In addition, 90% o f the CAAHEP accredited athletic
training education programs have a mission statement.
CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs (98.1%) link the
segments of didactic and clinical learning. In addition, 96.2% of the sample CAAHEP
programs have established communication between the segments o f the didactic and
clinical learning. Integration o f the relevant didactic and clinical experiences occurs in
88.5% of the sample CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs.
Three clinical supervisory models exist, but two models are dominate in the
student athletic trainer clinical experience. The Inspection-Production Supervision model
where clinical experience emphasizes the development o f specific performance goals to be
accomplished during that segment o f the clinical experience is utilized by 38.5 % of the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
68
sample CAAHEP accredited athletic training education programs. The Clinical
Supervision model where clinical experience emphasizes direct observation with
importance on correcting performance weaknesses is utilized by approximately 33% of the
sample CAAHEP accredited athletic training education programs. The third clinical
supervisory model, developmental supervision, emphasizes supervisor and student athletic
trainer collaboration o f performance goals for personal growth. Approximately 19% of
the sample CAAHEP accredited athletic training education programs use the
developmental supervision model.
Student Evaluation Process
Table 11 summarizes the academic and clinical evaluation activities. On the
average, direct observation accounted for approximately 76% of the evaluation methods
utilized by the sample CAAHEP accredited athletic training education programs.
Additional clinical evaluation methods and respective means include the essay test at
approximately 6%, written patient management problems at approximately 4%,
standardized patient performance examinations at approximately 2%, computer based
simulations at .5%, and critical incident reports at .3%.
All forms o f the objective test are the most predominant evaluation method (mean
44.8%) of all methods used to appraise the didactic material in sample CAAHEP
Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs. Additional didactic evaluation methods
on the average include the essay test at approximately 9%, written patient management
problems at approximately 9%, direct observation at approximately 15%, standardized
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
69
patient performance examinations at approximately 15%, computer based simulations at
approximately 3%, and critical incident reports at 1%.
Table 11
Summary of Academic and Clinical Evaluation Activities of CAAHEP Accredited Athletic
Training Education Programs (N=52)
Function Average usage (%)
Academic Evaluation
Written Patient Management Problems 8.6
Computer-based Simulations (Text Only) 2.0
Computer-based Simulations (Video Discs) .4
Computer-based Simulations (Interactive Multimedia) .9
Standardized Patients/Performance Test 15.2
Direct Observation of Performance 14.8
Objective Tests (All Forms) 44.8
Essay Test 8.6
Critical Incident Report 1.0
Other 3.7
Clinical Evaluation
Written Patient Management Problems 4.1
Computer-based Simulations (Text Only) .4
Computer-based Simulations (Video Discs) 0.0
Computer-based Simulations (Interactive Multimedia) .1
Standardized Patient/Performance Test 2.3
Direct Observation of Performance 75.9
Objective Tests (All Forms) 5.7
Essay Test .3
Critical Incident Report 4.6
Other 2.8
Case Study Perceptions
The internship program had previously chosen not to seek CAAHEP accreditation
because the personnel structure of the Program Director did not meet the CAAHEP
accreditation essentials and guidelines. CAAHEP accreditation criteria require the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
70
program director to be a “full-time employee o f the sponsoring institution and must be a
member o f the teaching faculty.” The internship athletic training education program’s
position of Program Director was a staff position as an athletic trainer in athletics. The
athletic training education program existed in the athletics department and not an
academic unit. The athletic trainers in the athletic department sought to “inform” and
“educate” the academic unit about the need to have the athletic training education
program director position in an academic unit and the CAAHEP accreditation
requirements. Two years later, the efforts o f the athletic trainers to “inform” and
“educate” the academic department resulted in an academic tenure track position for a
program director of athletic training education. The internship program now has a faculty
member in athletic training on a tenure track position in the academic department. The
internship program is now completing the required CAAHEP self-study before submitting
application for CAAHEP accreditation.
The academic structure o f the CAAHEP accredited athletic training program had
existed in the former NAT APEC approved program for approximately ten years before it
sought CAAHEP accreditation. The previous two program directors were credited with
the foresight to prepare the academic department for the CAAHEP accreditation
endeavor.
The current administrative structure of the academic programs o f the case study
participants were identical. Each program has only one full time academic athletic training
faculty member on tenure track who serves as program director. The program directors
o f each program were also responsible for the coordination o f academic and clinical
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
71
education besides teaching and department responsibilities. Both programs have
suggested they feel the number of full time academic athletic training faculty will be a
major obstacle for them to achieve or maintain CAAHEP accreditation. In addition, the
CAAHEP program states “facilities are not adequate for clinical instruction” as a potential
obstacle to accreditation renewal.
The individuals identified as the part time athletic training faculty in the academic
department and are teaching in the CAAHEP accredited and the internship programs
usually have a full time clinical appointment in the athletics department. The teaching
duties o f these part time athletic training faculty were described as part o f their athletics
department duties with monetary “buy outs” or “trade offs” between the academic
department and athletics. In some cases the athletic trainers were paid additional monies
by the academic unit as a part time faculty member.
Program growth requires additional educational resources to adapt to the increase
in student demand. The demand influencing the educational resources is the need for
more athletic training faculty in the academic unit. The CAAHEP accredited program and
the internship programs have different perceptions on how to seek additional athletic
training faculty. The Department Chair o f the internship athletic training education
program feels that 1.5 positions are sufficient to sustain all aspects o f the program because
its enrollment has a cap o f twenty students. The athletic training education program’s
faculty support was the one full time academic position (program director) and a one-half
position part time (instructional support). According to the internship Department Chair
the one-half position part time will always be filled by an athletic trainer in Athletics. The
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
72
internship program athletic training faculty recognize the Department Chair philosophical
position. However, in time the internship program hopes the Department Chair’s
perception will change.
The CAAHEP accredited athletic training education program’s perception of its
athletic training faculty contrasts that of the internship program’s philosophy. The
academic unit of the CAAHEP accredited athletic training education program and the
Athletic Department wish to be completely independent from each other. Historically,
Physical Education and Athletics were considered the same. During the past fifteen years
as Athletics has separated its self from Physical Education with a philosophical movement
toward sport performance and financial rewards. As stated previously, the CAAHEP
program currently relies on an athletic trainer in athletics to teach in the athletic training
education program. In the 1999-2000 academic year o f the CAAHEP accredited athletic
training education program, a faculty member in another discipline in the academic unit
will retire. The academic department will be discussing whether to request replacement
of the retiring faculty member with an individual o f similar expertise or reallocate the
position to another discipline within the academic unit. The CAAHEP athletic training
education program will present its need justification to request an additional full time
academic position in the athletic training education program. The CAAHEP athletic
training faculty acknowledges those requests for faculty positions are part of the political
environment of its Department and campus.
The CAAHEP accredited and the internship athletic training education programs
described themselves as “fortunate” to have a collegial relationship and similar
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
73
philosophical opinions between the program director o f the athletic training education
program and the head athletic trainer in athletics. Both programs also stated that “many
athletic training education programs with separate program directors and head athletic
trainers have difficult relationships.” The “difficulty” results from differences in
philosophical opinions regarding CAAHEP and job responsibilities. Both programs
described the relationship between the Program Director and Head Athletic Trainer as
“wonderful,” “great” or “could not be better.” Evaluation methods in the didactic and
clinical settings o f the case study have similar representation to the survey responses.
Research Question 3: Do associations exist between the administrative
characteristics o f the CAAHEP programs and student performance on the national
certification examination?
Table 12 shows the sample’s average performance level on the 1997 and 1998
NATABOC certification examinations. As stated in Chapter III, summary certification
results for a given year are reported to the institution only if the institution had five or
more students sit for the examination. The results are combined for all candidates, that is,
the average performance represents both first-time and repeat examinations. Ninety
percent (47) in the sample had five or more students take the NATABOC certification
examination in 1997 or 1998. O f these 47 programs, 39 responded to the survey
questions regarding certification performance. Four o f these programs, however, listed an
average pass rate o f 100% and indicated that “all of their students passed eventually”.
This statement implies that these programs kept track o f students over time and reported
this data rather than the data given for a particular year. Therefore, these programs were
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
74
dropped from the analysis leaving a final sample o f 35. It is important to note that six
schools within the final sample reported 100% pass rates for all components. These
institutions, unlike the four that were dropped, did not give any indication that they were
reporting data different from that provided by the NATABOC (i.e. by cohort rather than
by examination year). However, since a 100% pass rate in all components across two
years was considered to be unusual, all analyses were performed on the sample o f 35 as
well as a sample o f 29 which excluded the six schools o f concern. Basically the same
results were found for both samples. Therefore, for simplicity, only the results for the
larger sample of 35 are reported in this chapter.
Approximately 92% o f the sample CAAHEP accredited Athletic Training
Education Programs reported having students participate in the NATABOC certification
examination In 1997, approximately 90% of the sample CAAHEP accredited Athletic
Training Education Programs had five or more students participate in the NATABOC
certification examination. The overall passing rate average on the NATABOC
certification examination for the 1997 with valid data was approximately 78%. The 1997
NATABOC certification averages of the subcomponents were: a) the written test was
approximately 83%, b) the practical examination was approximately 82%, and c) the
written simulation was approximately 77% as seen in Table 12.
In 1998, approximately 90% of the sample CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training
Education Programs had five or more students participate in the NATABOC certification
examination. Table 12 also summarizes student performance for 1998. The overall
passing rate average on the NATABOC certification examination for 1998 with valid data
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
was approximately 76 %. The 1998 NATABOC certification averages of the
subcomponents o f the examination were: a) the written test was approximately 81%, b)
the practical examination was approximately 81%, and c) the written simulation was
approximately 78%.
Table 12
Summary of Student Performance on the NATABOC Certification Examination of
CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs
Certification Examination N
1997
(N=47)
M (%)
SD N
1998
(N=47)
M (%)
SD
Overall Pass Rate 32 78.03 21.46 34 75.97 20.57
Sub-component Pass Rate
Written 30 82.60 18.50 35 80.63 20.96
Practical 30 82.30 18.07 35 80.51 17.97
Simulation 30 77.07 22.77 35 77.97 20.88
The relationship between the data of the 1997 and 1998 NATABOC certification
examinations and several administrative questions of interest were investigated. Questions
of interest were selected from the administrative structure portion of the survey. The
questions of interest are referenced in Table 13.
Several variables were restructured for the correlation and ANOVA analyses. See
Table 13 for reference. Question 13 was collapsed to reflect the presence or absence of a
collegial model for organizational culture. Responses that represented combination of
collegial and non-collegial organizational cultures were eliminated (3.8%). Question 15
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
76
was collapsed to reflect the presence or absence of an inspection-production clinical
supervisory model. Responses that represented combination o f the inspection-production
and non-inspection-production clinical supervisory models were eliminated (9.6%).
Table 13
Selected Administrative Structure Questions for the Correlation and ANOVA Comparisons
Question Content
1, 2,3 Collapsed Variables for Program Director’s Role
2 Coordinator of Academic Education
3 Coordinator of Clinical Education
4 Allied Health Advisory Group
5 Vision Statement
9 State Regulation
11 Former NAT APEC Approved Athletic Training Education Program
13 Collegial versus Non-collegial Organizational Culture
15 Inspection-production versus Non-inspection-production Clinical
Supervisory Model
18 Athletic Training Faculty on Academic Appointment
22, a, b, c Collapsed Variables for Program Director’s Role with Clinical
Assignment
23 Full time Athletic Trainers in Athletics
25, a, b, c Collapsed variables for the Teaching Responsibility of the
Athletics Athletic Trainer
Three new variables were created: a) Program Director’s Role, b) Program
Director’s Role with Clinical Assignment, and c) Teaching Responsibilities of the Athletics
Trainer. The first variable, Program Director’s Role, was created from the responses to
Questions 1, 2, 3. The Program Director’s Role variable reflected the role of the Program
Director as: a) program director only, b) program director and coordinator of academic
education, c) program director and coordinator o f clinical education, and d) program
director and coordinator of academic and clinical education. Based on the frequencies of
the newly created variable, Program Director’s Role, was further collapsed to reflect the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
77
role o f the Program Director as: a) Program Director responsible only for academic
activities, and b) Program Director responsible for academic and clinical activities. The
categories o f program director only (0%) and program director and coordinator o f clinical
education (5.8%) were eliminated
A second variable, Program Director’ s Role with Clinical Assignment, was
created from the responses to Question 22, 22a, 22b, 22c. The Program Director’s Role
with Clinical Assignment variable reflected the role o f the program director as: a) no
responsibility for clinical service in athletics, and b) responsibility for clinical service in
athletics. A third variable, Teaching Responsibilities o f the Athletics Athletic Trainer, was
created from the responses to Question 25, 25a, 25b, 25c. The third variable reflected the
role o f the athletic trainers in athletics as: a) no teaching responsibilities in the athletic
training education program, and b) teaching responsibilities in the athletic training
education program.
Pearson Correlations (2-tail) were run between the questions o f interest (See Table
13) and the 1997 and 1998 NATABOC Certification Performance data. Table 14
summarizes the correlations for the 1997 exam and Table 15 summarizes the data for the
1998 exam. The patterns of correlations are quite similar across the two years. A
significant relationship between “having a clinical coordinator” and the performance on
simulation component of the certification examination was found in both years 1997 and
1998 (r=.453 and .424, p<.05 respectively). A significant relationship was also found
between “having the program director responsible for both clinical and academic
activities” versus “having the program director just responsible for the academic activities”
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
78
and the written component o f the certification exam. This relationship was found for both
years 1997 and 1998 (r=.409, p<.05 and r=.475, p<.01 respectively). In addition, this
relationship was also found for the overall exam score in the year 1997 but not in 1998.
Table 14
Pearson Correlation of Selected Administrative Structure Questions and the 1997 NATABOC
Certification Performance of CAAHEP Programs
Question / Content Overall
Correlation
Written Practical Simulation
1,2,3 Collapsed Variables for Program
Director’s Role .364 * .409 * .240 .334
2 Coordinator of Academic Education -.189 .001 .126 .220
3 Coordinator of Clinical Education .185 .227 .260 .453 *
4 Allied Health Advisory Group -.151 -.070 -.015 -.025
5 Vision Statement .235 .147 .133 .235
9 State Regulation -.116 .011 .318 -.014
11 Former NATAPEC Approved Athletic
Training Education Program -.192 -.178 -.185 -.190
13 Collegial versus Non-collegial
Organizational Culture .240 .273 .482 ** .176
15 Inspection-production versus Non-
inspection-production Clinical
Supervisory Model .082 -.154 .299 .323
18 Athletic Training Faculty on
Academic Appointment .140 .134 .404 * .271
22,
a, b, c Collapsed Variables for Program
Director’s Role with Clinical
Assignment -.001 -.164 -.086 .000
23 Full Time Athletic Trainers in Athletics .015 -.017 .004 -.023
25,
a, b, c Collapsed Variables for the Teaching
Responsibility of the Athletics
Athletic Trainer .131 .221 .186 .132
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
79
Table 15
Pearson Correlation of Selected Administrative Structure Questions and the 1998 NATABOC
Certification Performance of CAAHEP Programs
Question / Content Overall
Correlation
Written Practical Simulation
1,2,3 Collapsed Variables for Program
Director’s Role .337 .475 ** .331 .308
2 Coordinator of Academic Education -.241 -.258 -.221 -.158
3 Coordinator of Clinical Education .131 .169 .242 .424*
4 Allied Health Advisory Group -.130 -.092 -.102 -.059
5 Vision Statement .027 -.065 .180 .127
9 State Regulation -.148 -.114 .172 -.135
11 Forma- NATAPEC Approved Athletic
Training Education Program -.075 .106 .138 .124
13 Collegial versus Non-collegial
Organizational Culture .183 .3 7 2 * .491 ** .345*
15 Inspection-production versus Non-
inspection-production Clinical
Supervisory Model .174 .202 .249 .234
18 Athletic Training Faculty on Academic
Appointment .159 .241 .351 * -.217
22,
a,b, c Collapsed Variables for Program
Director’s Role with Clinical
Assignment -.120 .092 .124 -.026
23 Full Time Athletic Trainers
in Athletics -.218 -.211 -.097 .044
25,
a, b, c Collapsed Variables for the Teaching
Responsibility of the Athletics
Athletic Trainers -.053 -.163 -.205 -.093
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
The total number of full time athletic training faculty (including appointee in
academics and athletics) was significantly related to performance of students on the
practical examination component. This relationship was also noted for both years 1997
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
80
and 1998 (r=.404, p<.05 andr=.351, p<.05 respectively). In 1997, only the practical
examination showed a significant relationship with “having a collegial organizational
culture.” Finally, in 1998 having a collegial organizational culture was significantly related
to all three examination components: written (i=.372, p<05); practical (r=.491, p<01);
and simulation (r=.345, p<.05).
Multiple regression analyses were performed on both the 1997 and 1998 sets o f
performance data. No greater predictability was identified for any component by
combining variables that was reported for the variables singly.
One way ANOVAs were performed for the questions of interest (See Table 13)
and the 1997 and 1998 NATABOC Certification Performance data. The results are
similar to those found for the correlational analysis. Tables 16 to 18 summarize the
significant differences in the performance levels found for the dichotomous variables.
Table 16
Mean Differences on the Simulation Test given the Presence or Absence of Unique
Coordinator of Clinical Education
Simulation Test
1997 1998
Coordinator of Clinical Education M SD M SD
Unique 84.26 13.99 84.87 15.65
Non-unique 62.60 30.50 66.17 25.32
p<05 p<05
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
81
Table 17
Mean Differences on the Written Test given the Program Director’s Role for Academic
Activities Only versus Both Academic and Clinical Activities
Program Director’s Role
Written Test
1997
M SD
1998
M SD
Academic Activities Only
Academic and Clinical Activities
77.00 19.80
93.11 8.30
75.33 20.37
95.00 8.84
p<.05 p<.01
Table 18
Mean Differences of the Written Test, Practical Test and Simulation Test given Collegial
Organizational Culture versus Non-collegial Organizational Culture
Organizational Culture
Written
M SD
Practical
M SD
Simulation
M SD
1997
Collegial
Non-collegial
85.08
72.67
18.01
18.59
86.58
65.17
15.68
17.95
79.04
69.17
24.80
9.26
p<.05
1998
Collegial
Non-collegial
84.68
67.22
16.49
27.38
86.16
66.33
14.24
20.40
82.60
66.33
18.75
23.75
p<.05 p<.01 p<05
Case Study Perceptions
Regardless o f the route to certification as an athletic trainer all candidates for the
NATABOC certification examination for entry level athletic trainers take the same
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
82
examination. The documentation of student performance on the certification examination
is different for the CAAHEP accredited athletic training education program compared
with the internship athletic training education program. The CAAHEP accredited
program is provided a yearly summary of student performance from the NATABOC if five
or more students participate in the certification examination. The internship athletic
training education program does not receive summary data from the NATABOC
regarding student performance. Performance data collected by the internship program is
based on the student sharing the information with the internship program director. Most
often the internship student states “I passed” or “I did not pass” the certification
examination or there is “No report” from the student. Unfortunately scores on the
individual components o f the certification examination are usually not provided by the
student. As a result the internship program finds it difficult to identify program
components that need improvement.
The CAAHEP accredited athletic training education program viewed the program
director as the Coordinator of Academic and Clinical Education. In Athletics, the athletic
trainers viewed themselves as clinical instructors and relied on the Program Director’s
guidance for the student’s clinical experience. The perception in the internship athletic
training education program was different. The internship program director felt responsible
for coordinating the academic and clinical education. However, the internship head
athletic trainer felt the program director was the coordinator of academic education only
and the coordinator o f clinical education was the role o f the head athletic trainer.
Regardless, the internship program director acknowledged responsibilities for both roles
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
83
by stating “it is difficult to tell the training room staff that the way they do things, cannot
be done that way because o f accreditation requirements.” Despite the different perceptions
of the CAAHEP and internship programs and within the internship program, each program
felt a collegial environment existed among all personnel.
As expressed in the Research Question 2 case study perceptions, both the
CAAHEP accredited and internship programs are concerned about total number o f athletic
training faculty. Of more concern was the number of academic faculty. The total number
o f athletic training faculty (approximately 3) in each programs is less than the average o f
the survey results (4.5). Both programs would like to increase the academic athletic
training faculty from one to two individuals. The internship program director implied that
help with clinical education and program management would be appreciated. As
discussed in previous case study perceptions, both programs feel that the lack of a
“sufficient” full time academic faculty may affect their ability to obtain or maintain
CAAHEP accreditation.
Research Question 4: Do associations exist between university or departmental
contextual variables and student performance on the national certification?
The correlation analyses did not identify any significant association between
university or department contextual variables and student performance on the national
certification examination.
Case Study Perceptions
The internship athletic training education program, overall, did not identify
significant associations between the university or department environmental variables that
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
84
would have an effect their student’s performance on the certification examination
presently. However, the internship program director expressed concern regarding recent
recommendations (June 1999) for education and certification reform by the NATA
Education Council. The internship program director expects the recommendations will
have a degree o f unknown impact on the athletic training education program A meeting
with the internship Department Chair has been scheduled to discuss the recommendations.
The CAAHEP accredited athletic training education program did not identify
significant associations between the university or department environmental variables that
would have an effect their student’s performance on the certification examination
presently. The head athletic trainer said the CAAHEP program as part o f the program’s
self study planned to revise existing and develop new courses for the athletic training
curriculum However, three potential issues that may affect the accreditation process and
indirectly affect student certification performances are: a) campus curriculum issues, b)
campus political environment, and c) accreditation costs. The campus o f the CAAHEP
accredited athletic training education program is carefully scrutinizing all campus
curriculum changes related course development and revision. The University does not
want to continue to add courses. It wants to avoid duplication of course content and
courses regardless of discipline. Each department /program must document and justify its
curriculum needs. Again, the political environment of the department, college, and campus
is anticipated to influence curriculum and personnel needs. During the program’s previous
CAAHEP accreditation process, the University’s administration raised questions: “How
many programs is the University going to continue to accredit?; How many programs does
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
85
the University wish fund beyond the campus?; The annual accreditation fee.; The self
study fees.; Faculty release time to do the self-study?; etc.” The CAAHEP accredited
athletic training education program expects those questions to be asked before the athletic
training education’s program study is complete.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
86
CHAPTER V
Discussion
The purpose of the study was to identify the administrative characteristics of
current CAAHEP accredited athletic training education programs; to investigate the
relationship between these characteristics and a program’s success rate on the NATABOC
certification examination; and to investigate any impact the characteristics might have on
the decision by academic units to pursue or maintain a CAAHEP accredited athletic
training education program. The findings could provide a basis for solutions or strategies
for real or imagined barriers to CAAHEP accreditation. The NATA Education Task
Force has made some recommendations for curricular and certification reform that the
NATA has adopted (National Athletic Trainers’ Association Education Task Force,
1997/February). The adopted recommendations are being implemented over the next five
years and could affect an institution’s educational resources, particularly personnel
(academic faculty).
The sample of survey respondents in this study consisted of 54 (57.14%)
CAAHEP accredited athletic training education programs in the United States. The
investigator expected the survey respondent percentage to be 72-100%. This return
percentage was based on previous return percentages of other studies involving CAAHEP
accredited athletic training education programs. However, the other CAAHEP studies did
not request certification performance data from the institutions. Considering the
sensitivity o f the certification data, institutions may have chosen not to participate despite
the confidentiality procedures. The case study interviewees’ also displayed uneasiness
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
87
during the interview discussion regarding student performance on the certification
examination.
The survey results did not indicate any unusual contextual and environmental
characteristics of CAAHEP accredited athletic training education programs that would
significantly influence obtaining or maintaining CAAHEP accreditation. Four interesting
characteristics should be noted. First, the most frequent home o f the academic department
(23.07%) is in the College of Education and not a College of Health and Human Services
or Professional Programs as might be expected. The investigator was surprised by this
characteristic since athletic training is formally recognized by the AMA as an allied health
profession. The investigator had suspected the athletic training education program would
realign the program to a college with similar professional programs. Based on the case
study data, a pattern appears that Kinesiology departments may not house other programs
that have national accreditation standards, except for those programs meeting the state
teaching credential requirements. In the future, athletic training education programs may
have to align themselves with departments and colleges familiar with accreditation
standards and requirements.
Second, the total number o f undergraduate majors in the home department is small
(250 median). Third, the total department faculty in proportion to the undergraduate
majors is also small (13 median). The average number o f students in the athletic training
education program is 31.50 (median) representing approximately 12% of the median
undergraduate major population in the home department. Thus, considering the faculty
required for the department’s core instruction and expertise instruction, the full time
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
88
academic faculty needed for the athletic training education program could represent a
potential 1.5 positions. The average number of full time academic athletic training faculty
is 2.1 (mean) and only .9 (mean) tenured or .8 (mean) tenure track. This implies the
number o f these academic positions will probably not increase. Since program and faculty
need is based on a variety o f department and institutional factors, the chance of the athletic
training education program exceeding the median majors (31.5) enrollment is slim
(Hackman, 1991; Whalen, 1991).
Fourth, approximately 86% o f the sample CAAHEP accredited educational
programs for the athletic trainer also has additional educational requirements of state
regulation to satisfy. National accreditation standards for the education and the
certification of the athletic trainer with the presence o f athletic training regulation in a
state present a unique twist to a discipline’s professional growth. In the future, national
accreditation, certification requirements, and individual state regulation laws will provide
very definitive specifications and criterion for athletic training education programs.
It is this investigator’s impression that the overall size o f the athletic training
faculty and majors of existing CAAHEP accredited athletic training education program
will not increase. This opinion reflects that athletic training education programs are
housed within a department and not as an independent department (i.e., physical therapy
and nursing). An accredited athletic training education program within an existing
department may not experience true professional program growth, but will experience
limited or no growth as determined by the other disciplines in the department. As result,
the total number o f CAAHEP accredited athletic training education programs throughout
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
89
the United States will expand as more educational institutions seek accreditation for their
athletic training education programs
CAAHEP recognizes the program director of the athletic training educational
program as the primary administrator. The academic unit o f the athletic training program
typically considers the program director as the only faculty for all athletic training course
work in addition to regular department and university responsibilities. The work
expectations of the program director may exceed physical and productivity capacity,
resulting in a detrimental effect on the faculty, students, program, department, and
university. Each academic department should have a minimum o f two full time faculty in
each academic expertise area (Higgins, March 02, 1998). In Higgins’ report of an external
review of an academic department in Kinesiology, the reviewer made a recommendation
to the Department that stabilization of a program is important and dependent on the
number of faculty in each program Programs with less than two full time academic
faculty members have a tendency to collapse or become extinct in time. Unfortunately,
when several disciplines exist in one department the faculty have a tendency to see only
their individual needs and not the department’s global needs. It is the opinion of this
investigator that a program has a chance to survive and grow successfully when adequate
personnel and resources are available. A Department should not provide minimal support
to a program as a public relations ploy just to say “we have that program” with no sincere
intent of future commitment and growth. A department should focus on what it does well.
Organizational culture in the student’s clinical experience affected performance on
the certification examination. Those programs where collegiality was displayed did better
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
90
than alternate models. Of further interest, but not determined by this study, would be
examining interaction and type o f relationship between the program director and the head
athletic trainer. This interest arises because the employment o f the program director and
head athletic trainer are in two separate departments. Each individual has a different
perspective on academic and clinical responsibilities (academics versus athletics).
Regardless, CAAHEP holds the program director and academic department responsible
for the student’s clinical instruction and outcomes. As this study discovered, the type of
organizational culture existing in the athletic training clinical setting affects student
performance on the certification examination. Therefore, it is this investigator’s position
that the program director and the head athletic trainer should have a collegial relationship
and share similar thoughts about academic and clinical education.
The academic department o f the athletic training education program relies heavily
on the athletic trainers in athletics to fill the “gap” or “absences” in their athletic training
instructional faculty. Approximately 78% of the athletic trainers in Athletics teach in the
athletic training education program. O f concern, as with the program director, is the work
overload and expectations of the athletic trainer in athletics. The investigator’s opinion
reflects the attitude that the Departments of Athletics and the academic unit of the athletic
training education program should be educationally and financially independent. The
athletic training educator should be in charge of the academic and clinical education of the
students. The athletic trainers in Athletics should provide clinical education support as
clinical instructors.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
91
Student evaluation in the didactic and clinical segments of the athletic training
education program is of critical concern. Assessment in the academic and clinical
segments do not adequately replicate critical components of the NATABOC certification
examination format. Written Patient Management Problems and Standardized Patient
Performance Tests represent two-thirds o f the NATABOC certification examination. On
the average, Written Patient Management Problems and Standardized Patient Performance
Tests represent 22.8% of the didactic evaluation methods utilized in the athletic training
education program. In the clinical setting, Written Patient Management Problems and
Standardized Patient Performance Tests represent only 6.4% of the evaluation methods.
An imbalance exists between the evaluation methods in the athletic training education
programs and the national certification examination format. No relationship was
documented of these clinical evaluation methods with the certification examination format.
The dominant student clinical evaluation method is direct observation but has no
relationship to the certification examination format and becomes the time consuming
responsibility o f the coordinator o f clinical education.
Conclusions
1. The Program director is typically responsible for coordination o f academic and
clinical education in addition to his or her teaching duties.
The survey showed that in 33 of 52 CAAHEP accredited athletic training
education programs the program director had responsibilities as coordinator o f academic
education and coordinator of clinical education.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
92
2. More full time academic athletic training faculty have a lecturer position than a
tenured/tenure track position.
The survey indicated 1.6 full time athletic training faculty are on a lecturer
position. Only .9 and .8 are tenured or on a tenure track respectively.
3. Most o f the full time athletic training faculty are not in the academic department.
Results of the survey indicate that on the average there are 4.5 full time athletic
training faculty. On the average, 2.9 athletic trainers are employed in Athletics as
compared to 2.1 faculty in academia.
4. Seventy-eight percent o f the athletic trainers in athletics teach in the athletic
training education program.
The survey showed on the average 78.4% o f the athletic trainers in Athletics teach
in the athletic training education program.
5. Approximately 50 % o f the full time academic faculty have a clinical assignment in
athletics.
Table 9 shows that approximately 50% of the full time academic athletic training
faculty have assignments/clinical responsibilities. On the average 43% of the full time
athletic training faculty academic work load were related to clinical duties. Of the 43%
work load, approximately 49% is attributed to student supervision and 47% is associated
with athletic health care.
6. More females are enrolled in the athletic training education programs than males.
Table 5 shows on the average 57.1% of the students enrolled in a CAAHEP
accredited athletic training education program is female.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
93
7. Department administrators do not understand the accreditation process and rely on the
full time academic athletic training faculty for information.
According to the case study, the department chairs o f the CAAHEP accredited and
internship athletic training education programs are not familiar with the accreditation
standards for athletic training. Both department chairs stated reliance on the athletic
training faculty for consultation and accreditation information.
8. Written patient management problems have low usage as an evaluation method in
athletic training education programs even though the patient management problems are
used on the NATABOC certification examination.
According to Table 11, the survey showed on the average that written patient
management problems were used in academic evaluation and clinical evaluation 8.6% and
4.1% respectively.
9. Standardized patient performance examinations (practical) are not used by clinical
faculty even though used on certification examinations.
According to Table 11, the survey indicated standardized patient management
problems on the average are used in academic evaluation and clinical evaluation 15.2%
and 2.3% respectively.
10. Direct observation is the predominant clinical evaluation method.
The survey shows in Table 11 that on the average 75.9% use direct observation as
the dominant clinical evaluation method.
11. Organizational structure and culture (Collegial) o f the clinical experience affects the
written, practical, and simulation tests of the national certification examination.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
94
The Pearson Correlation showed a significant relationship with a “having a
collegial organizational culture” in 1997. In 1998, the collegial organizational culture was
significantly related to all three components of the certification examination.
12. Most athletic training clinical settings use the matrix organizational model.
The matrix organizational structure model is characterized by work being
divided among colleagues according to expertise and/or according to the types o f work or
services being provided.
The results of the survey indicate that on the average 80.8% use the matrix
organizational structure model.
Recommendations
1. The academic unit housing the athletic training education program should increase the
hiring of athletic training educators in tenured/tenure track positions. A minimum of two
full time tenure/tenure track faculty in the academic unit of the athletic training education
program should be considered.
Data from the sample of this survey indicates that 1.6 full time academic faculty in
athletic training education are lecturers. The data also shows only .9 and .8 are tenured or
in tenure track positions respectively. An external program reviewer (Higgins, March 02,
1998), an expert in the Kinesiology discipline, recommended to a Kinesiology Department
that a minimum of two tenured/tenure track faculty are needed to support specialized
academic areas minimally The lack of “sufficient” faculty is detrimental to the academic
program, department, and university. According to the survey data, on the average 4.5
represents the total number o f athletic training faculty (full time and part time) on
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
95
academic appointment. The total number o f faculty alone (4.5) positively influenced
student performance on the practical test o f the certification examination in 1997 and 1998
(r=.404, p<.05; r=.351; p<.05 respectively). The data implies that an athletic training
education program with a “sufficient” number of full time academic faculty may perform
better on the certification examination.
2. A Coordinator of Clinical Education, under the guidance o f the Program Director,
should be included as part o f the academic organizational structure.
According to the survey results, 16 o f the 52 sample CAAHEP athletic training
education programs have an individual as a coordinator o f clinical education who is
different from the Program Director. The analyses performed in this study found that the
unique coordinator of clinical education was significantly related to student performance
on the written simulation component o f the national certification examination This
relationship is noted for 1997 and 1998 (r=.453, p<.05 and r=.424, p<.05 respectively).
It is not the investigator’s intention to suggest a unique Coordinator o f Clinical
Education and the Program Director should work in isolation of each other. However, the
investigator does suggest the Program Director and Coordinator o f Clinical Education
work together to maximize the strengths o f each role.
The CAAHEP essentials and guidelines recognize the Program Director as the
primary administrator for academic and clinical education. The Program Director is held
accountable for the leadership and outcomes of the athletic training education program
As a result it is appropriate that the line of authority should require the Coordinator of
Clinical Education to be accountable to the Program Director.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
96
The Program Director’s involvement in all the academic and clinical activities of
the athletic training education program is critical to student performance. The survey data
has shown that the program director’s role in academic and clinical activities can influence
positively student performance on the national certification examination. The program
director’s role in academic and clinical activities influenced student performance in the
1997 overall score and written component (r=.364, p<05; r=.409, p<.05 respectively) of
the certification examination In 1998, the program director’s role in academic and
clinical activities influenced student performance on the written component (r=.475,
p < 0 1). The Program Director and Coordinator of Clinical Education should not work in
isolation o f each other.
3. The academic unit that houses the athletic training education program should end
reliance on athletic trainers in Athletics to teach academic course work.
The survey results show that 78.4% of the athletic trainers in athletics teach in the
athletic training education program. In 60% of the athletic trainers in athletics that do
teach, do so as a part of an academic appointment in the academic unit. The remaining
40% o f the athletic trainers in athletics that do teach, do so as part o f their work
assignment (27.6%) in Athletics. The case study participants agreed that the athletic
trainer in athletics teaching in the athletic training education program provides a link
between academic and clinical education. However, the case study participants also said
that the available time for their primary job in providing athletic health care was
compromised due to teaching obligations. In addition, the case study participants also
agreed the combination of teaching and athletics responsibilities created a work overload
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
97
for the athletic trainer in Athletics. The case study participants implied that the athletic
trainers in athletics would be best used as clinical instructors for the athletic training
education program. Finally, academic instruction in athletic training education should be
taught by athletic training educators/athletic trainers that have a background in pedagogy.
4. Further research is required to investigate the implications of the Program Director and
other full time academic athletic training faculty performing clinical services for athletics.
Approximately 51 % of the Program Directors in the sample population have
clinical responsibilities in Athletics. Is this clinical responsibility for the program directors
and other full time academic athletic training faculty due to the type o f position held in the
academic unit (See Recommendation I for discussion)? Does the type of position
influence whether the full time academic athletic training education faculty have to meet
academic rigors for creative and scholarly activity, teaching, department service, and
university service? For example, in the case study, the tenure track program director of
the internship athletic training education program felt the obligations of tenure and
academia could not be met if clinical duties in athletics were required. What is the opinion
of program directors and other full time athletic training faculty in academia about
performing clinical duties in Athletics? What is the opinion of the full time athletic trainers
in athletics of program directors and other full time athletic training faculty performing
duties in Athletics? Further research is needed to assess the above questions.
A strong link must exist between the academic and clinical segments o f the
athletic training education program. The survey data has shown that the program
director’s role in academic and clinical activities can influence positively student
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
98
performance on the national certification examination- The program director’s role in
academic and clinical activities influenced student performance in the 1997 overall score
and written component (r=.364, p<.05; r=.409, p<.05 respectively) of the certification
examination. In 1998, the program director’s role in academic and clinical activities
influenced student performance on the written component (r=.475, p<.01). The program
director needs to be involved in all aspects o f the academic and clinical activities o f the
athletic training education program.
5. The use o f written patient management problems and standardized patient performance
examinations in the didactic and clinical settings in athletic training education programs
should increase.
The NATABOC certification examination for entry level athletic trainers consists
of three components: written examination, practical examination, and written simulation.
The candidate for athletic training certification must pass all three parts to be an “athletic
trainer certified.” Each component represents approximately one-third o f the certification
examination. The written examination consists of 150 five option multiple choice
questions according to the athletic training performance domains. The practical
examination is equivalent to the allied health professions standardized
patients/performance test. The written simulation is equivalent to the allied health
professions written patient management problems. Theoretically, the academic and
clinical evaluation methods o f students in a professional program should be representative
of the certification examination format.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
99
According to the survey results and confirmed by the case studies, the
predominant academic evaluation method (44.8%) in the athletic training education
programs were objective tests (All Forms). However, written patient management
problems and standardized patients/performance test accounts for 8.6% and 15.2%,
respectively, o f the academic evaluation methods.
In the athletic training clinical setting, direct observation accounted for
approximately 75% o f the evaluation methods in the CAAHEP sample and confirmed by
the case studies. However, written patient management problems and standardized
patients/performance test accounts for 4.1% and 2.3%, respectively, of the clinical
evaluation methods. An imbalance appears to exist between the athletic training
certification examination and the evaluation methods in the academic and clinical settings.
The athletic training education program’s failure to use academic and clinical evaluation
methods representative and characteristic of the national certification examination may
have a negative influence on student performance. Students should have the opportunity
to experience and learn from evaluation methods representative of the professional
practice and the national certification examination.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
100
Bibliography
A.B. 420, California Legislature, 1999-2000 Regular Session (1999).
A.B. 1725, Chapter 973, CA. Statutes o f 1988 (1988).
Amheim, D. D., & Prentice, W. E. (1997). The athletic trainer. In Principles of
athletic training (9th ed.), (pp. 2-29). St. Louis: Brown and Benchmark.
Bailey, R. G. (1974). A brief history o f athletic training. Unpublished master’s
thesis, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon.
Bailey, T. (1991). Jobs of the future and the education they will require: Evidence
from occupational forecasts. Educational Researcher. 20 (2), 11 -20.
Baldridge, J. V., Curtis, D. V., Ecker, G. P., & Riley, G. L. (1991). Alternative
models of governance in higher education. In M. W. Peterson, E. E. Chaffee, T. H. White
(Eds.). Organization and governance in higher education (pp.30-45). Needham Heights,
MA: Ginn Press.
Behnke, R. (1991/April). NATA “approved” to CAHEA “accredited”: the
transition. NATA News, p. 4-5.
Benbassat, J., Bridgham, R., Curry, L., Dauphinee, D., Friedman, C., Gale-Grant,
J., Sellers, E., Spooner, J. H., & Swanson, D. (1986, June). Essays on curriculum
development and evaluation in medicine. Report of the Second Cambridge Conference:
An International Workshop held at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C.
Canada.
Benenson, T. F., Stimmel, B., & Smith, H., Jr. (1978). Concurrent criterion
validity of a modified pass/fail grading system and associated error rates. Educational and
Psychological Measurement. 38. 405-410.
Broadbent, J., & Roberts, J. (1997). The end of the professions? In J. Broadbent,
M. Dietrich, & J. Roberts (Eds.), The end of the professions? The restructuring of
professional work (pp. 1-13). London: Routledge.
Calhoun, J. G., Wolf, F. M., Maxim, B. R., & Davis, W. K. (1985). Validity
coefficients o f clinical competence on nbme part IH examination. Journal of Medical
Education 60. 189-192.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
101
Cavanaugh, S. H., & McGuire, C.H. (April, 1988). Written simulations in
professional education and evaluation: Current practices, problems, and future directions,
mini-course. New Orleans: Annual Meeting o f the American Educational Research
Association.
Committee on Allied Health Education and Accreditation. (1991). Essentials and
guidelines for an accredited educational program for the athletic trainer. Chicago:
American Medical Association.
Committee on Allied Health Education and Accreditation. (1992). Essentials and
guidelines for an accredited educational program for athletic training. Chicago: American
Medical Association.
Dawson, B., Iwamoto, C. K., Ross, L. P., Nungester, R. J., Swanson, D. B., &
Voile, R L. (1994). Performance on the national board of medical examiners: Part 1
examination by men and women of different race and ethnicity. Journal o f the American
Medical Association. 272 (9), 674-679.
Day, S. C., Norcini, J. J., Diserrens, D., Cebul, R. D., Schwartz, J. S., Beck, L. H.,
Webster, G. D., Schnabel, T.G., & Elstein, A. (1990). The validity o f an essay test of
clinical judgment. Academic Medicine. 65 (Suppl. 9), S39-40.
Deal, T. E. & Kennedy, A. A. (1982a). Strong cultures: the new “old rule” for
business success. In Corporate Culture: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life (pp. 3-
19). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Deal, T. E. & Kennedy, A. A. (1982b). Diagnosis: Learning to read cultures. In
Corporate Culture: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life (pp. 129-139). Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Delforge, G. D. (1982). The athletic training major: A report from the
professional education committee. Athletic Training: Journal of the National Athletic
Trainers Association. 17. 288-290.
Delforge, G. D. (1983, June). Athletic training: A profession? Paper presented at
the 34I l L Annual Meeting and Clinical Symposia o f the National Athletic Trainers’
Association, Denver, Colorado.
Delforge, G. D., & Behnke, R. S. (1999). The history and evolution of athletic
training education in the United States. Journal o f Athletic Training. 34 (1), 53-61.
Dowaliby, F. J. & Andre, B. J. (1976). Relationships between clinical competence
ratings and examination performance. Journal o f Medical Education. 51. 181-188.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
102
Duthie, E. H., Jr., Kirsling, R. A., & Donnelly, M. B. (1985). Findings on
geriatric medicine and gerontology from the nbme examinations. Journal o f Medical
Education. 60. 330-331.
Fabb, W. E., & Marshall, J R. (1983). The assessment of clinical competence in
general family practice. Hingham, MA: MTP Press Limited.
Forsythe, G. B. McGaghie, W. C., & Friedman, C. P. (1986). Construct validity
o f medical clinical competence measures: A multitrait-multimethod matrix study using
confirmatory factor analysis. American Educational Research Journal. 23. 315-336.
Foster, T. (1995, February). The father o f modem athletic training: William E.
“Pinky” Newell. NATA News, pp. 4, 6, 8.
Friedson, E. (1986). Professional powers. Chicago: University o f Chicago Press.
Gonella, J. S. (1985). Editorial: Evaluation of clinical competence. Journal of
Medical Education. 60. 70-71.
Gonnella, J. S. & Hojat, M. (1983). Relationship between performance in medical
school and postgraduate competence. Journal o f Medical Education. 58. 679-685.
Gray, R. S. (1997). The role o f the clinical athletic trainer. In J. G. Konin (Ed.),
Clinical Athletic Training (pp. 2-9). Thorofare, New Jersey: SLACK Incorporated.
Hackman, J. D. (1991). Power and centrality in the allocation o f resources in
colleges and universities. In M. W. Peterson, E. E. Chaffee, T. H. White (Eds.),
Organization and governance in higher education (pp.268-283). Needham Heights, M A
Ginn Press.
Haladyna, T. M. (1994). A research agenda for licensing and certification testing
validation studies. Evaluation & the Health Professions. 17 (2), 242-256.
Harrelson, G.L., Gallaspy, J. B., Knight, H. V., & Leaver-Dunn, D. (1998).
Predictors o f success on the NATABOC certification examination. Journal o f Athletic
Training. 32 (4), 323-327.
Higgins, S. (March 02, 1998). California State University, Long Beach: External
Program Review for Department o f Kinesiology and Physical Education.
Kane, M. T. (1992). The assessment o f professional competence. Evaluation &
the Health Professions. 15 (2Y 163-182.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
103
Kane, M. T. (1994). Validating Interpretive arguments for licensure and
certification examinations. Evaluation & the Health Professions. 17 (2). 133-159.
Kane, M. (1997). Model-based practice analysis and test specifications. Applied
Measurement in Education. 10 (1), 5-18.
Kegerreis, S. T. (1980). Professional advancement o f athletic via documentation
and publication. Athletic Training: Journal of the National Athletic Trainers Association.
15 (1), 47-48.
Keskula, D., Sammerone, P. G., & Perrin, D.H. (1995). Prediction of academic
achievement in an NATA-approved graduate athletic training education program. Journal
o f Athletic Training. 30 (1). 55-56.
Korman, M. & Stubblefield, R. L. (1971). Medical school evaluation and
internship clerkship performance. Journal of Medical Education. 46. 670-673.
Leonardson, G. R. & Peterson, L. P. (1985). Relationship between subject
examination scores in clerkships and academic and demographic factors. Journal of
Medical Education. 60. 719-721.
Market, R. J. (1986). Biostatistics and epidemiology content of the nbme part I
and II examinations. Journal o f Medical Education. 61. 331.
Mathies, A. L., Denegar, C. R., & Amhold, R. W. (1995). Changes in athletic
training education as a result o f changing from NATA-PEC to CAAHEP. Journal of
Athletic Training. 30 (2). 129-130.
McGaghie, W. C. (1991). Professional competence evaluation. Educational
Researcher. 20 (1), 3-9.
McGuire, C.H., Solomon, L.M., & Bashook, P. G. (1976). Construction and use
o f written simulations. U.S.A.: The Psychological Corporation.
McGuire, C.H., Solomon, L.M., & Forman, P. M. (1976). Clinical simulations:
Selected problems in patient management (2nd ed.). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
McMullan, D. (1996/February). Renewing athletic training education: A step into
the fixture. NATA News, p. 17-18.
McMullan, D. ( 1997/February). NATA board takes first step in reform. NATA
News, p. 4-6, 25.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
104
McNeil, J.D. (1977). Curriculum: A comprehensive introduction. Boston: Little,
Brown and Company.
Menges, R. J. (1975). Assessing readiness of professional practice. Review of
Educational Research. 45. 173-207.
Middlehurst, R., & Kennie, T. (1997). Leading professionals: Toward new
concepts o f professionalism. In J. Broadbent, M. Dietrich, & J. Roberts (Eds.), The End
o f the Professions? The Restructuring of Professional Work (pp. 50-68). London:
Routledge.
Miller, S. J. (1970). Approval of athletic training curriculums at colleges and
universities [Reprint: (1999). Journal of the National Athletic Trainers Association, 34
(1), 62-63]. Athletic Training: Journal o f the National Athletic Trainers’ Association.
5(2).
Murphy, J. P., Rosevear, G. C., & Gary, N. E. (1984). Concordance o f medical
school course grades and nbme parts I and II examination subject test scores. Journal of
Medical Education. 59. 828-831.
National Athletic Trainers’ Association. (1990/September). AMA endorses
athletic training as allied health profession. NATA News, p. 4.
National Athletic Trainers’ Association. (1994/May). JRC-AT update. NATA
News, p. 34.
National Athletic Trainers’ Association. (1996a/February). A report from the
education task force. NATA News, p. 19-27.
National Athletic Trainers’ Association. (1996/February). Recommendations to
reform athletic training education. NATA News, p. 16-24.
National Athletic Trainers’ Association. (1997/January). NATA board o f directors
adopts recommendations for education reform. NATA News, p. 6, 17.
National Athletic Trainers Association Board of Certification, Inc. (June, 1996).
Credentialing information: Entrv-level eligibility requirements. Dallas: National Athletic
Trainers Association Board of Certification, Inc.
National Athletic Trainers Association Board of Certification, Inc. ( 1993). Study
guide for the NATA board of certification, inc.: Entrv-level athletic trainer certification
examination (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: F.A. Davis Company.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
105
National Athletic Trainers’ Association Education Task Force. (1997/February).
Recommendations to reform athletic training education. NATA News, pp. 16-24.
Newell, W. E. (1984). Reflections on athletic training. Athletic Training: Journal
o f the National Athletic Trainers Association. 19. 256-259, 311.
Norcini, J. J. (1994). Examining the examinations for licensure and certification in
medicine [Editorial], Journal of the American Medical Association. 272 (9), 713-714.
Norcini, J. J., Webster, G. D., Grosso, L. J., & Blank, J. A. Jr. (1987). Ratings of
residents’ clinical competence and performance on certification examination. Journal of
Medical Education. 62 (6), 457-462.
Odden, A. R. & Picus, L.O. (1992). School finance: A policy perspective. New
York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
O’Shea, M E. (1980). A history o f the national athletic trainers association.
Greenville, NC: National Athletic Trainers’ Association.
Ostemig, L. R. (1988). Research in athletic training: The missing ingredient.
Athletic Training- Journal o f the National Athletic Trainers Association. 23 (3), pp. 223-
225.
Perrin, D. H. (1999). The golden anniversary of athletic training [Editorial].
Journal of Athletic Training. 34 (1), p. 1.
Ray, R. (1994). Management Strategies in Athletic Training. Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics Publishers.
Raymond, M. R. (1995, April). Job analysis and the development of test
specifications for licensure and certification examinations. Paper presented at the annual
meeting o f the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Francisco, CA.
Shea, J. A., Norcini, J. J., & Kimball, H. R. (1993). Relationships of ratings of
clinical competence and ABIM scores to certification status. Academic Medicine. 68
(SuppL 10), S22-24.
Sheets, K. J. & Anderson, W. A. (1991). The reporting of curriculum
development activities in the health professions. Teaching and Learning in Medicine. 3
(4), 221-226.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
106
Schwank, W. C., & Miller, S. J. (1971/September). New dimensions for the
athletic training profession. Journal o f Health Physical Education and Recreation, p. 41-
43.
Sheets, K. J. & Anderson W. A. (1991). The reporting of curriculum
development activity in the health professions. Teaching and Learning in Medicine. 3 (4),
85-90.
Starkey, C. (1997). Reforming athletic training education. Journal o f Athletic
Training. 32. 113-114.
Starkey, C. & Henderson, J. (1995). Performance on the athletic training
certification examination based on candidates’ routes to eligibility. Journal o f Athletic
Training. 30 (1), 59-62.
Swanson, D. B., Case, S. M., & Nungester, R. J. (1991). Academic Medicine.
66. September Supplement, S7-9.
Swanson, D. B., Norman, R. N., & Linn, R. L. (1995). Performance-based
assessment: Lessons from the health professions. Educational Researcher. 24 (5), 5-11,
35.
Tamblyn, R. (1994). Is the public being protected? Prevention o f suboptimal
medical practice through training programs and credentialing examinations. Evaluation &
the Health Professions. 17 (21. 198-221.
Tanner, D., & Tanner, L. (19871 Supervision in education. New York:
Macmillan.
Turner, B. J., Hojat, M., & Gonnella, J. S. (1987). Using rating of resident
competence to evaluate nbme examination passing standards. Journal of Medical
Education. 62. 572-581.
Veloski, J., Herman, M. W., Gonnella, J. S., Zeleznik, C., & Kellow, W. F.
(1979). Relationships between performance in medical school and first postgraduate year.
Journal of Medical Education. 54. 909-916.
Voll, C. A., Goodwin, J. E., & Pitney, W. A. (1999). Athletic training education
programs: To rank or not to rank. Journal of Athletic Training. 34 (1), 48-52.
Westphalen, S. W. & McLean, L. Jr. (1978). Seven years of certification by the
NATA. Athletic Training: Journal o f the National Athletic Trainers Association. 13 (21.
86-88,91.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
107
Whalen, E. L. (1991). Responsibility center budgeting: An approach to
decentralized management for institutions of higher education. Bloomington and
Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
Wingard, J. R. & Williamson, J. W. (1973). Grades as predictors of physicians’
career performance: An evaluative literature review. Journal of Medical Education. 48.
311-322.
Young, L. D., Camp, M.G., & Bradley, L. A. (1986). Use of external
examinations to involve faculty in curriculum content evaluation. Evaluation and the
Health Profession. 9. 325-338.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
108
Appendix A
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
109
A th le tic T ra in e r
E s s e n t i a l s a n d G u i d e l i n e s
f o r a n Accredited E d u c a tio n a l P ro g ra m f o r tb e A th letic T rainer
E s s e n tia ls in itially a d o p te d in 1991 by the
A m erica* A c*d«m y of Fam ily Pteysiclaa*
A m erica* A cad em y o f P t f lit r ie *
N atlaaal A th letic T>aia«rm' A aaocfatloa
and the
Amarlean M edical A sso cia tio n
T h e C o m m itte e o n A llie d H e a lth E d u c a tio n a n d A c c r e d ita tio n
(CA H EA ) grants accred itatio n to program s fo r th e A thletic T tain cr u p o n
th e re c o m m e n d atio n o f th e J o i n t R e v ie w C o m m itte e o n E d u c a tio n a l
P r o g r a m s in A th le tic T ra in in g (JRC-AT).
T h e s e E w ^ f f a l ^ a r g m c .m im m u m -s. . ^
m g th a tp r i^ ^ m m S y ^ S tn O s 7ccT cntc^A ihlc
— 'LPt.qoality.c-
scituce ebe mtnimiiin requirpncnis joTwhictf aS_acpredjB^ p ro g q g n u » T .- .
is held r - —- - :r^■ — >--•—
in outline I
The G uidH iiy^j jccompinying thc.EsimdaU pn^de.^ajmg
tended ta'isito in^iniaprctmg^c^eslaitials.'Guidcliner'™
ed in italic tspefice in mnnttrc foraCvc,^-
Sections I and III of these Essentials are common to all educational
programs accredited by C AH EA.
Section II contains a description of the profession and the specific
requirements for preparing Athletic Trainers.
P ream b le O b je c tiv e
T h e A m erican Academy o f Fam ilv Physicians.
T h e .American Academy o f P ediatrics, th e N ational
A thletic Trainers* A ssociation iNATA). and th e
A m erican Medical .Association c o o p e rate to estab
lish. m aintain and p ro m o te a p p ro p ria te stan
d ard s of quality to r e d u ca tio n a l program s in
U hlettc Training and to p ro v id e reco g n itio n for
ed u ca tio n al programs w h ich m ee t o r exceed th e
m inim um standards o u tlin e d m th e se E s s e n tia ls
Lists o f accred ited p ro g ram s are p u b lish e d for
th e inform ation o f stu d en ts, em ployers, e d u ca
tional in stitu tio n s a n d agencies, a n d th e p u b lic
These standards a re to b e used fo r th e dev elo p
m ent. evaluation, a n d self-analysis o f A thletic
Training program s. O n -site review team s assist
in th e evaluation o f a p ro g ram s relative co m p li
ance w ith the E s s e n tia ls
S ectio n I:
G eneral
R eq u irem en ts
for A ccred itatio n
A. S p o n s o rs h ip
1* T h e sponsoring in stitu tio n an d affiliates, if
any. m ust be accredited bv reco g n ized agencies
o r m eet equivalent standards
2 . In program s in w hich a cad em ic a n d clinical
d id ac tic an d supervised p ra c tic e are p ro v id ed
by tw o o r m ore institutions, resp o n sib ilities fo r
pro g ram adm inistration, in s tru c tio n , su p erv i
sio n . and o th e r functions o f th e sp o n so rin g in
stitu tio n s and o f each affiliate m u st be clearly
d o cu m e n ted as a form al affiliation ag reem en t o r
m em o ran d u m o f understanding.
3 . Accredited e d u c a tio n a l program s m av be
established in s e n io r colleges a n d universities,
and in o th e r in s titu tio n s o r c o n so rtia w h ic h
m eet com parable s tan d a rd s for e d u c a tio n in
Athletic Training.
4. The sp o n so rin g in s titu tio n assum es p rim ary
responsibility fo r s tu d e n t ad m issio n , cu rricu lu m
planning, selectio n o f co u rse c o n te n t, co o rd in a
tion o f classroom te a c h in g and su p erv ise d clini
cal practice, a p p o in tm e n t o f faculty, receiving
an d processing a p p lic atio n s fo r ad m issio n , and
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
110
Section I
continued
granting th e certificate o r d e g re e d o cu m en tin g
satisfactory c om pletion o f th e ed u catio n al pro
gram. T he sp o n so rin g in stitu tio n shall also be
responsible fo r providing assu ran ce that the
practice activities assigned to stu d en ts in a clin
ical setting are ap p ro p riate to th e program .
5. S ponsoring institutions m ust b e authorized
under applicable law o r ocher accep tab le au
th ority to pro v id e a program o f poscsccondary
education.
B. R e s o u rc e s
1. Personnel
a . A d m in is tra tiv e P e rs o n n e l
The program m ust have ad eq u ate leadership
and m anagem ent. T hese officials shall possess the
necessary qualifications to p e rfo rm th e functions
identified in do cu m en ted iob d escrip tio n s
(1) P r o g ra m D ir e c to r
(a) R e s p o n s ib ilitie s
T he Program D irector shall b e responsible
for th e day-to-day o p eratio n , co o rd in atio n ,
supervision, an d evaluation o f all aspects o f
the athletic training ed u ca tio n al program .
A d m in istra tiv e a n d s u p e r v iso r y responsi
b ilities o f th e P rogram D irec to r sh o u ld be
recognized in term s o f " relea sed tim e "
fr o m o th er d e p a r tm e n ta l a ssig n m en ts. The
a m o u n t o f released tim e s h o u ld be consis
tent w ith d e p a rtm e n ta l o r in s titu tio n a l
policy, b u t s h o u ld be d e em e d a p p ro p ria te
in eieu* o f th e a d m in is tr a tiv e resp o n sib ili
ties o f the P rogram Director.
(b) Q u a lific a tio n s
The Program D irector shall be a full-tim e
em ployee o f th e sponsoring in stitu tio n and
m ust be a m em b er o f th e te ach in g faculty
as defined by school polio*. T h e Program
D irector shall also have c u rre n t NATA recog
nition as a certified ath letic tra in e r o r pos
sess equivalent qualifications a n d have ap
propriate experience, as su ch , in th e clinical
supervision o f student ath letic trainers.
The P rogram D irector s h o u ld b a n e a m in i
m u m o f three y ea r s exp erien ce a s a n .V.47M
certified A th letic Trainer: The P ro g ra m D i
rector s h o u ld h a v e a s tro n g a c a d e m ic
o rien ta tio n a n d sh o u ld h a v e d e m o n stra te d
a sincere in terest in the p r o fe s s io n a l p r e p a
ration o f s tu d e n t a th letic tra in ers. D em o n
strated in v o lv e m e n t in a th le tic tr a in in g
a n d sp o rts m e d icin e through p u b lic a tio n s,
p u b lic s p e a k in g research, a n d m em b ersh ip
in related p ro fessio n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s is
highly d e sira b le
b. I n s tr u c tio n a l S ta ff
(1) C lin ic a l I n s t r u c t o r
(a) R e s p o n s ib ilitie s
A clinical in stru c to r is a faculty o r staff
m em ber w h o provides d irect supervision
and in stru ctio n o f stu d en ts in th e clinical
aspect o f th e ath letic train in g educational
program .
(b) Q u a lific a tio n s
A clinical in stru c to r shall have current N*ATa
recognition as a certified ath letic trainer o r
possess equivalent qualifications and have
appropriate experience, as such, in the clin i
cal supervision o f stu d en t athletic trainers
C lin ica l in stru c to rs s h o u ld h a ve a m in i
m u m o f o n e y e a r exp erien ce a s a it XATA
c ertified A th letic T rainer .4 c lin ic a l in stru c
to r sh o u ld h a v e a stro n g a c a d e m ic o rien ta
tion. d e m o n stra te d c lin ic a l teaching skills,
a n d a sincere in terest in th e p ro fessio n a l
p rep a ra tio n o f s tu d e n t a th le tic trainers:
D em o n stra ted in v o lv e m e n t in athletic
tra in in g a n d sp o rts m e d ic in e through p u b
lications. p u b lic sp ea kin g , research, a n d
m em bership in related p ro fessio n a l o rg a n i
za tio n s is h ig h ly desirable.
(2) O th e r I n s tr u c tio n a l S ta ff
(a) R e s p o n s ib ilitie s
The teaching faculty o f th e athletic training
educational program shall b e identified is
those faculty m em bers ro p o n s ib lc for
teaching in th e required subiect m atter area>
specified m Section 1 1 and o tn c r coursew ork
included in th e athletic train in g curnculum
as identified bv th e in stitu tio n .
Because o f th e in te r d isc ip lin a r y n a tu re o f
the a th letic tr a in in g e d u c a tio n a l p ro g ra m ,
the teaching fa c u lty m a y b e com prised o f
in d iv id u a ls fr o m va rio u s a c a d em ic u n its
in clu d in g m edicine, btology. chem istry,
physics, psychology, e d u ca tio n , h o m e eco
nom ics. h ealth a n d p h y sic a l education.
(b) Q u a lific a tio n s
Faculty m em bers responsible for teaching
required subiect m atter m ust be qualified
through professional p rep aratio n and experi
ence in th e ir respective acad em ic areas.
(c) N u m b e r
There shall be sufficient faculty to provide
students w ith adequate atte n tio n , instruc
tion. and supervised practice to acquire the
know ledge and co m p eten ce needed for en
try into th e o ccupation.
A lt fa c u lty m em b ers a ssig n e d to teach re
q u ired subject m a tte r s h o u ld be fa m ilia r w ith
the " C o m p e te n c ie s in A th le tic T ra in in g "
a s they• p e rta in to th e ir respective
2
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
tea ch in g areas. In a d d itio n , fa c u lty m e m -
bers te a c h in g coursew ork in c lu d e d in the
a th le tic tr a in in g cu rric u lu m s h o u ld d e m
o n stra te a sin ce re interest in a ssistin g s tu
d e n ts in d e ve lo p m e n t o f the a th le tic tr a in
in g com petencies.
c. M ed ic a l a n d A llie d H e a lth P e rs o n n e l
T h e athletic training ed ucation p ro g ram m ust
assure adequate o p p o rtu n ity for a th le tic train*
ing students to b eco m e fam iliar w ith th e roles
a n d responsibilities o f various m edical an d al
lied h ealth p erso n n el com prising th e sp o rts
m edicine team .
There s h o u ld be in v o lv e m e n t o f v a r io u s m e d i
c a l a n d a llie d h e a lth p erso n n el in b o th class
ro o m a n d c lin ic a l in stru ctio n . M ed ica l a n d a l
lie d h ea lth p e rs o n n e l m a y o r m a y n o t b o ld
fo r m a l a p p o in tm e n ts to the in s tru c tio n a l s t a f f
X evertheless. th e ir in v o lv e m e n t o n a p la n n e d .
regular, a n d c o n tin u in g basts is h ig h ly desirable.
(1) T eam P h y s ic ia n (s)
T h e team physiciants) must be involved in
che athletic train in g educational program .
The te a m p b y stc ia n should h a v e a sincere
interest in the p ro fessio n a l p r e p a r a tio n o f
th e a th le tic tr a in in g stu d en t a n d s h o u ld be
tr illin g to share his/h er kno w led g e through
o n -g o tn g in fo r m a l discussion, clinics, a n d
o th e r in-service ed u ca tio n a l sessions. In
v o lv em e n t o f the te a m ph ysicia n a s a f u l l
tim e o r p a r t-tim e classroom in s tru c to r o r
g u e st lectu rer is encouraged.
The a th le tic tr a in in g room p ro vid e s the
clin ic a l settin g in w hich the s tu d e n t a th le t
ic tr a n te r is e xp o sed to the m e d ic a l p r a c
tices o f th e te a m physician. Thus, th e tea m
p h ysicia n 's p resen ce in the a th letic tr a in in g
ro o m o n a reg u la r basis is a n im p o r ta n t
aspect o f the s tu d e n t's clinical experience.
(2) A d d itio n a l M ed ic a l a a d A Jlied H e a lth
P e rs o n n e l
T here m ust be involvem ent o f a variety o f
m edical specialists and allied health personnel
as full-tim e o r part-tim e classroom instructors,
guest lecturers, o r clinical instructors.
Physical therapists, o ccu p a tio n a l th e r
apists. dentists, nurses, a n d sp ec ia lists in
fa m ily p ractice, orthopaedics, neurology,
cardiology, p ed ia trics, in tern a l m ed icin e,
ophthalm ology, a n d physical m e d icin e sh o u ld
be u tiliz e d to e n h a n c e a n d d iv e rsify the
cu rricu lu m offerings a n d clinical experiences
d . C le ric a l a n d S u p p o r t S ta ff
Adequate clcrtcal an d o th e r support staff shall
be available.
e. P r o fe s s io n a l D e v e lo p m e n t
Program s vhall en co u rag e program staff an d fac
u lty to pursue c o n tin u in g professional g ro w th
to assure that program faculty and officials can
fulfill th eir responsibilities.
2 . F in a n c ia l R e s o u rc e s
Resources to o p erate an educational program
shall be ensured to fulfil! obligations to
m atriculating and enrolled students.
1 P h y s ic al R e s o u rc e s
a . F a c ilitie s
A dequate classroom s, laboratories, clinical an d
o th e r facilities, a n d adm inistrative offices shall
b e provided for students, program staff, and
faculty.
T h e athletic training room provides th e p rim ary
facility in w hich th e clinical aspect o f th e a th
letic training educational program is co n d u cted .
A thletic training room s m ust provide adequate
sp ace fo r effective learning experiences fo r all
ath letic training students enrolled m the clinical
asp ect o f th e program .
S p a c e req u irem en ts w ill d ep en d n o t o n ly u p o n
th e n u m b e r o f a th le tic tra in in g stu d en ts to be
s u p ervised a t a n y o n e tu n e b u t also u p o n the
d a ily tr a in in g ro o m case lo a d associated w ith
h e a lth care to stu d en t athletes.
b. E q u ip m e n t a n d S u p p lie s
A ppropriate and sufficient equipm ent, supplies,
an d storage space shall be provided for stu d en t
use and fo r teaching th e didactic and su p er
vised clinical practice com ponents o f th e c u r
riculum . Instructional aids such as clinical
specim ens, docum ents and related m aterials,
reference m aterials, equipm ent, and d em o n stra
tio n aids m ust be provided w hen required by
th e types o f learning experiences delineated for
e ith e r th e didactic o r supervised clinical e d u ca
tion com p o n en ts o f the curriculum .
(1) T h e r a p e u tic M o d a litie s a n d
R e h a b ilita tio n
A w ide range o f contem porary therapeutic
m odalities and rehabilitation equipm ent
m ust be available for instructional purposes.
Such e q u ip m e n t sh ould in clu d e a refrtgera-
tnr.'tce m achine, c o m m o n ly used h y d m th er -
a p e u tic a n d electrotherapeutic agents, a s
so rte d exercise e q u ip m en t fisom etric, a n d
isokinetic), a n d o th e r co n tem p o ra ry devices.
(2 ) F irs t A id a n d E m e rg e n c y C are
E q u ip m e n t
E quipm ent and supplies necessarv fo r the
a p p ro p riate initial m anagem ent o f acute a th
letic m iunes/illnesses m ust be available in
o rd e r to provide the athletic training stu
d e n t w ith instruction in first aid and em er
g ency care procedures.
B a sic eq u ip m en t should in clu d e stretchers,
s p in e boartis. a p p ro p ria te c a rd io p u lm o n a ry
3
S«ction l
con tinu ed
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
112
Saction I
c o n tin u ed
resu sc ita tio n e q u ip m e n t, a sso rte d sp lin ts,
ba n d a g es, a n d d ressin g s
c. L e a rn in g R e s o u rc e s
(1) Library
Students shall have ready access in tim e and
lo ca tio n to an ad eq u ate su p p ly ot* c u rre n t
books, jo u rn a ls, p erio d icals, an d o ch er refe r
e n c e m aterials related to th e cu rricu lu m .
R esource m a te ria ls m a y be h o u sed in tbe
u n iv e r s ity lib r a ry a n d /o r d e p a r tm e n t li
brary. R eference m a te r ia l s h o u ld a lso b e
a v a ila b le in tb e c lin ic a l s e ttin g a n d /o r tb e
P ro g ra m D irector's o ffic e
(2) I n s tr u c tio n a l A id s
A dequate audio-visual a n d o th e r ap p ro p ria te
in stru ctio n a l aids muse b e available fo r use
by a th le tic training ed u ca tio n a l program
p e rso n n el.
' C lin ic a l subjects, sp ecim ens, a th le tic in ju r y
m a n a g e m e n t records a n d fo r m s , c o m p u te r
h a r d w a r e a n d softw are, a n d a u d io a n d
v isu a l resources s h o u ld b e a v a ila b le in
s u ffic ie n t n u m b e r a n d q u a lity to e n h a n ce
s tu d e n t lea rn in g .
C. S tu d e n ts
1. A d m issio n P o lie U s a n d P r o c e d u re s
A dm ission o f stu d en ts, in clu d in g ad v an ced
p lacem en t, sh all be m ad e in acc o rd a n c e w ith
d e a rly d efin ed a n d pu b lish ed practices o f th e
in stitu tio n . A ny specific acad em ic and technical
standards re q u ired fo r adm ission to th e p ro
gram shall also b e clearly d efin e d and p u b
lished. and read ilv accessible to p ro sp ectiv e s tu
dents an d th e public.
If a program ad m its any stu d en ts o n th e basis
o f ability to ben efit, th en it m ust em ploy a p
p ropriate m e th o d s, such as a pre-adm ission test
o r evaluation, fo r d eterm ining th a t such s tu
dents are in fact capable o f b en efitin g from th e
training o r ed u ca tio n offered.
Policies regarding advanced p lacem en t, tran sfe r
o f cred it an d c re d it for ex p erien tial learn in g
shall be readily accessible to p ro sp ectiv e s tu
dents. R equirem ents fo r p rev io u s e d u ca tio n o r
w o rk ex p erien ce shall be p ro v id ed an d readily
accessible.
2 . E v a lu a tio n o f S tu d e n ts
C riteria fo r successful c o m p le tio n o f each seg
m en t o f th e cu rricu lu m an d fo r g rad u a tio n shall
be given in ad v an ce to each stu d en t. E valuation
m ethods isystem s) shall in c lu d e co n te n t related
to th e objectives an d co m p eten cies d e sc rib e d in
th e cu rricu lu m fo r both d id a c tic an d su p erv ise d
clinical ed u ca tio n co m p o n en ts. T h ey shall
be em ploved freq u en tly en o u g h to pro v id e
stu d en ts a n d p rogram officials w ith tim ely
indication* o f th e students* progress and
academ ic sta n d in g a n d to serve as a reliable
indicator o f th e effectiveness o f course design
an d in stru c tio n .
X H e alth
T h e p ro g ram officials shall establish a p ro c e
d u re fo r d e te rm in in g chat th e ap p lic an ts' o r stu
dents* h e alth w ill p e rm it them to m eet th e es
tablished w ritte n tech n ical standards o f th e
program . S tu d en ts m u st be inform ed o f and
have access to th e h ealth care services p rovided
to ocher s tu d e n ts o f th e institution.
4 . G u id a n ce
G uidance shall be available to assist stu d en ts in
u n d erstan d in g c o u rse co n te n t an d in observing
program p o licies a n d practices and to provide
counseling o r referral fo r problem s that m ay in
terfere w ith th e s tu d e n ts' progress through th e
program .
D- O p e ra tio n a l P o lic ie s
1 . F air P r a c tic e *
a . A n n o u n cem en ts and advertising m ust ac
curately reflect th e program offered.
b. Student a n d faculty rec ru itm en t and stu d en t
adm ission a n d faculty em ploym ent practices
shall be n o n -d iscrim m ato ry w ith respect to
race, color, cre ed , sex. age. disabling c o n d itio n s
(handicaps), an d natio n a l origin.
c. A cadem ic cre d it an d costs to th e student
shall be accu rately stated, published and m ade
know n to all applicants
d . The p rogram o r sponsoring in stitu tio n shall
have a d e fin e d a n d published policy and p ro c e
d u re for pro cessin g stu d en t and facultv
grievances.
e. Policies a n d processes for student w ith d raw
al and fo r refu n d s o f tuicion and fees shall be
published a n d m ad e know n to ail applicants
f. Policies an d processes by w hich students
m ay perfo rm serv ice w o rk w hile enrolled m
th e program m u st b e published and m ade
know n to all c o n c e rn e d in o rd e r to avoid p rac
tices in w h ich stu d en ts a re substituted fo r regu
lar staff. S tu d en ts m ay n o t take th e responsibil
ity o r th e p la c e o f qualified staff. However,
after d em o n stra tin g proficiency, students m ay
b e perm itted to u n d e rta k e certain defined ac
tivities w ith ap p ro p ria te supervision and d irec
tio n . S tudents m av b e em ployed in the field of
stu d y o u tsid e reg u lar ed ucational hours, p ro
vided th e w o rk d o c s not interfere w ith regular
academ ic responsibilities. T he w ork m ust be
n o n-com pulsory. a n d subject to standard em
ployee policies.
4
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
g . T h e health an d safety o f p a tie n ts, students,
a n d faculty associated w ith th e ed ucational ac
tivities o f th e stu d en ts m u st b e adequately
safeguarded.
h . A program ad m ittin g s tu d e n ts o n th e basis
o f ability to b en efit m u st p u b licize its objec-
tivcs. assessm ent m easures, a n d m eans o f evalu
atin g ability to b en efit.
2 . S tu d e n t R e c o rd s
Satisfactory records sh all b e m a in tain e d for stu-
d e n t adm ission, atte n d a n c e , a n d evaluation.
G rades and cre d it fo r co u rses shall b e recorded
o n th e student tra n sc rip t a n d p e rm a n e n tly
m aintained by th e s p o n so rin g in stitu tio n in a
safe and accessible lo c a tio n .
E. P ro g ram E v a lu a tio n
1 . T h e program m u s t c o n tin u a lly obtain and
p ro v id e substantial a n d a cc u ra te in fo rm atio n on
its educational effectiveness esp ecially as m eas
u red by student achievem ent.
2 . T h e program m ust m aintain c learly sp ecified
educational objectives co n sisten t w ith its m is
sion and appropriate in light o f th e d e g re e it
aw ards.
3 . T h e program m ust verify th a t satisfactio n
o f degree requirem ents by all s tu d e n ts is
reasonably docum ented a n d co n fo rm s w ith
co m m o n ly accepted standards fo r th e d e g re e
involved: also, that th e p rogram c o n fe rs a d e
g ree o n the basis o f ed u catio n al a ch iev em en t
assessed and docum ented th ro u g h a p p ro p ria te
m easures.
4 . a program m ust d o c u m e n t th a t th e e d u c a
tional achievem ents o f its stu d en ts a re v erifiable
an d assessed in consistent wavs
Section I
con tinu ed
A. D e scrip tio n o f t h e P ro fe s s io n
A n athletic tra in e r is a q u a lifie d a llied health
c are professional e d u ca te d a n d ex p erien ced in
th e m anagem ent o f h e a lth care problem s asso
cia ted w ith sp o rts p a rtic ip a tio n . In co o p eratio n
w ith physicians a n d o th e r allie d h ealth care
p erso n n el, th e ath letic tra in e r fu n ctio n s as an
integral m em ber o f th e a th le tic h ealth care team
in secondary sch o o ls, colleges a n d universities,
professional sp o rts p rogram s, sp o rts m edicine
clinics, and ocher ath letic h e a lth care settings.
T he athletic tra in e r fu n ctio n s m co o p eratio n
w ith m edical p erso n n el, a th le tic adm inistrators,
coaches, and parents in th e d e v elo p m en t and
co o rd in atio n or efficient a n d responsive athletic
h e alth care delivery system s.
T h e athletic train er's p ro fessio n al p reparation is
dire cted tow ard th e d e v e lo p m en t o f specified
com petencies in th e fo llo w in g d om ains; preven
tio n . recognition a n d ev alu atio n , manage*
m enc/treatm ent a n d d is p o sitio n , rehabilitation,
organization an d a d m in is tra tio n , and e ducation
a n d counseling. T h ro u g h a c o m b in atio n o f for
m al classroom in stru c tio n an d clinical experi
ence. th e athletic tra in e r is p re p ared to apply a
w id e variety o f sp ec ific h e alth care skills and
kno w led g e w ith in e ac h o f th e d o m ain s.
B. C urriculum
1. D e sc rip tio n o f t h e P ro g ra m
a . Faculty and s tu d en ts shall be p ro v id ed wich
a c le a r w ritten d e sc rip tio n o f th e program and
its co n ten t including lea rn in g goals, co u rse o b
jectives. supervised clinical p ractice assignm ents
a n d com petencies req u ired fo r g rad u atio n .
Tbe sta tem en t o f g o a ls a n d o b je c tive s s h o u ld
p m v id e the basts f o r p r o g ra m p la n n in g , im
p le m en ta tio n . a n d e v a lu a tio n . I t s h o u ld be
c o m p a tib le w ith b o th the m issio n o f th e s p o n
so rin g in stitu tio n fsj a n d tb e e x p e c ta tio n s o f
tbe profession a s reflected in S ectio n If, .-1. D e
s c rip tio n o f tbe P rofession, a n d d e sc r ib e d in
the c o m p a n io n d o c u m en t. C o m p e te n c ie s in
A th le tic T rain in g . C om petencies e n u m e r a te d
in tbe co m p a n io n d o c u m e n t rep resen t im p o r
ta n t guidelines f o r c u rr ic u lu m d esig n , d e v e lo p
m e n t o f in d iv id u a l course co n te n t. a n d s tr u c
tu r in g o f clinical experiences. These
com petencies sh o u ld b e a ch ieve d w ith in th e
fr a m e w o r k o f a p p ro p ria te ly seq u e n c ed b a sic
science, clinical science, a n d a th le tic h e a lth
ca re u n its, m odules, a n i t o r courses o f in s tr u c
tio n . acco m p a n ied o r fo llo w e d b y a ser ie s o f
s tru ctu red laboratory a n d c lin ic a l experiences.
C u rric u lu m content s h o u ld in c lu d e a p p r o p r i
a te in stru c tio n a l em p h a sis o n s p e c ifie d s u b je c t
m a tte r areas a s reflected in tb e c o m p a n io n
d o c u m en t. C o m p e te n c ie s in A th le tic T r a in
in g . P rogram p erso n n el resp o n sib le f o r c u r r ic
u lu m p la n n in g sh o u ld keep in fo r m e d o f recen t
role d elin ea tio n stu d ie s a s a b a sis f o r p r o g r a m
p la n n in g a n d revision.
A p ro g ra m should reg u la rly assess its g o a ls
a n d sta n d a rd s f o r a p p ro p ria te n e ss a n d d e m
o n stra te its a b ility to id e n tify a n d r e s p o n d to
changes in tbe needs a n d e x p e c ta tio n s o f its
c o m m u n itie s o f interest.
In agreem ent w ith the m issio n g o a ls a n d s ta n
d a rd s o f the sponsoring in s titu tio n a n d p r o
g ra m . o th e r courses o f s tu d y m a y b e n e ce ssa ry
S ection II:
R equirem ents
for A thletic
Training
5
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
114
S«ction II
continued
o r desirable. P rogram s a r e en co u ra g ed to in
c o rp o ra te g e n era l e d u ca tio n , lib era l arts, a n d
h u m a n itie s stu d ies w ith in th e ir cu rricu la , a n d
to p r o v id e o p p o rtu n itie s f o r la te r a c a d em ic
a n d c a reer growth.
b . S tudents m ust receive form al in stru ctio n in
th e follow ing subject m atter areas:
(1) prevention o f ath le tic injuries/illnesses
(2 ) evaluation o f ath letic injuries/illnesses
(3 ) first aid and em erg en cy care
(4 ) th erap eu tic m odalities
(5 ) therapeutic exercise
(6 ) adm inistration o f ath letic training
program s
(7) hum an anatom y
(8) hum an physiology
(9 ) exercise physiology
(10) kinesiology/biom echanics
(11) n u tritio n
(12) psychology*
(13) personal/com m unity health
This s u b jec t m a tte r s h o u ld c o n stitu te the
a c a d e m ic "core" o f th e cu rric u lu m . F orm al
in s tru c tio n in vo lves tea c h in g o f req u ired sub
je c t m a tte r in a stru c tu red classroom e n viro n
m e n t. In a d d itio n to the core su b ject m a tte r
areas, in c lu sio n o f o th e r le a rn in g experiences,
in c lu d in g fo r m a l course w o rk, m a y be neces
s a r y to in su re th a t s tu d e n ts a re p r o v id e d s u ffi
c ie n t o p p o r tu n ity to a tta in th e d esired c o m
p e te n cie s A d v a n ced a n d /o r sp ec ia lized courses
in th e core su b ject m a tte r a rea s a n d courses in
chem istry, physics, p h a rm a co lo g y, sta tistics
a n d research design a re reco m m en d ed . The
b rea d th a n d scope o f the a th le tic tr a in in g
c u rr ic u lu m sh o u ld be su ch th a t it is a n a lo g o u s
to a n a c a d e m ic m a jo r in the e d u c a tio n a l u n it
in w hich it is boused.
c. Program personnel m ust en su re that th e ob
jectives. content, and activities s a te d in the
cu rricu lu m represent cu rre n t co n cep ts and
practice.
d . T he ath letic training cu rricu lu m shall in
clu d e provision fo r clinical experiences under
th e d irect supervision o f a qualified clinical in
s tru c to r (see Section 1. B. 1) in an a cc e p a b le
clinical setting.
S h o u ld the P rogram D irec to r be a fa c u lty
m e m b e r o th e r th a n th e H ea d A th letic Trainer
a t the in s titu tio n sp o n so rin g the a th letic tra in in g
e d u c a tio n p ro g ra m , close co o p era tio n betw een
the P rogram D irector a n d th e a th le tic tra in in g
s ta ff w ill be necessary f o r effective p la n n in g
a n d im p le m e n ta tio n o f s tu d e n t c lin ic a l experi
ence in th e a th le tic tr a in in g p ro g ra m .
C lin ica l exp e rie n ce s s h o u ld be in itia ted early
in th e s tu d e n t s p r o g r a m a n d should be de
sig n ed to p r o v id e th e s tu d e n t w ith su fficien t
o p p o r tu n ity to d e v e lo p sp ecific com petencies
p e rta in in g to th e h e a lth care o f the athlete
These c o m p eten c ies a r e id e n tifie d w ithin the
p sve b o m o to r a s p e c ts o f each o f the d o m a in s
in c lu d e d in th e c o m p a n io n d o cum ent. C om
p e te n c ie s In A th le tic T ra in in g . W hile devel
o p m e n t o f p s y c h o m o to r skills should represent
a m a jo r fo c u s o f th e s tu d e n t’ s clinical experi
ence. a m p le o p p o r tu n ity sh o u ld also be p ro
vid ed f o r d e v e lo p m e n t a n d d em o n stra tio n o f
com p eten cies u ritb in th e cognitive a n d the a f
fe c tiv e aspects o f ea ch d o m a in id en tified in
the c o m p a n io n d o c u m e n t. It is recom m ended
th a t a m in im u m o f 8 0 0 clock hours o f clinical
experience be d is tr ib u te d a s e q u a lly a s possi
ble o v er the d u r a tio n o f the edu ca tio n a l p ro
gram .
The p r im a r y c lin ic a l settin g s should include
the a th le tic tr a in in g room /sj. athletic practices,
a n d c o m p e titiv e events. The athletic training
room is co n sid e red to b e "a designated p hysi
ca l fa c ility lo c a te d w ith in the sponsoring insti
tu tio n o r w ith in a n a ccep ta b le a ffilia ted clin i
ca l settin g in w h ic h com p reh en sive athletic
h ealth care services a r e p ro v id e d ." C omprehen
sive h ea lth c a re serv ice s in c lu d e practice a n d
g a m e p r e p a r a tio n , in ju ry /illn e ss evaluation,
fir s t a id a n d em erg e n c y care, fo llo w -u p care,
reh a b ilita tio n , a n d r ela ted services.
A m p le o p p o r tu n ity s h o u ld be p rovided fo r s:u-
dene coverage o f a th le tic practices a n d com
p e titiv e even ts in a v a r ie ty o f m en s a n d w om
en s sp o rts in c lu d in g , b u t n o t lim ited to. btgn
risk a c tiv itie s su ch a s fo o tb a ll, soccer bockev.
wrestling, b a ske tb a ll g ym nastics, vnllexoall
lacrosse, a n d rugby. These experiences should
also in clu d e a d e q u a te o p p o rtu n itie s fo r obser
va tio n o f a n d in v o lv e m e n t tn the fir st a id a nd
em ergency care o f a v a rte ty o f acute athietic
tn ju rtes a n d illnesses.
tn o rd er tn b r o a d en a n d su p p lem en t clintcal
experiences, the s p o n so r in g in stitu tio n m a r es
tablish fo r m a l a ffilia tio n s w ith other in stitu
tio n s w ith in th e im m e d ia te geographical area
fo r p ro visio n o f c lin ic a l experience settings,
in clu d in g a th le tic tr a in in g room s a n d athletic
practices a n d g a m e s in seco n d a ry schools, col
leges a n d u n iv ersities, o r p rofessional sports
orga n iza tio n s. Cse o f a ffilia te d clinical set
tings s h o u ld b e co n sid e red a n extension o f the
clin tca l asp ect o f th e p r o g ra m a n d thus suo/ect
to established s ta n d a r d s a n d criteria. It is
recom m ended th a t n o m o re th a n o n e-h a lf o f
the s tu d e n t s to ta l c lin ic a l experience be
g a m e d in a n a ffilia te d clin ic a l setting.
Supervised c lin ic a l exp erien ces should involve
d a ily p e rso n u l c o n ta c t b etw een the clinical in
structor a n d th e s tu d e n t tn the sa m e clinical
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
115
settin g . C lin ic a l instructors sh o u ld be r e a d ily p r o g ra m com petencies a n d c u r r ic u lu m objec- S e c t i o n II
accessible to stu d en ts f o r on-going in s tru c tio n tic e s s h o u ld be consistent w ith th e s ta te d level continued
a n d g u id a n c e o n a d a ily basis. A n e ffective o f p r a c titio n e r p re p a ra tio n . The level is
r a tio o f s tu d e n ts to clin ica l instructors s h o u ld d e lin e a ted in the p ro g ra m s g o a ls a n d o h /e c -
b e m a in ta in e d . D eterm in a tio n o f a n e ffe ctive tir e s sta tem e n ts a n d en co m p a sses the k n o w l-
stu d e n t-c lin ic a l in stru cto r ratio s h o u ld b e edge, skill, a n d b e h a vio r exp ected o f g r a d u a te s
b a s e d u p o n c onsideration o f the to ta l w o rk u p o n e n try in to the fie ld ,
to a d o f c lin ic a l instructors, a v a ila b ility a n d
a d e q u a c y o f clin ic a l facilities, a n d the n u m b e r In s tru c tio n a l P lan
a n d n a tu r e o f athletic p ro g ra m s bein g co~ In stru ctio n m ust follow a p lan w hich:
vered. A r a tio utbicb d o ts n o t exceed e ig h t (8) a _ docu m en ts appropriate le am .n g ex p erie n ces
s tu d e n ts to o n e ft) c lin ic a l in stru cto r d u r in g ^ clirriculum p e e i n g to dev elo p th e com -
tb e c o u rse o f a n a ca d em ic y e a r is rec o m m en d ed . necc3Sary fo r g rad u atio n , in c lu d in g
S p o n s o rin g in s titu tio n s are also e n co u ra g e d to ap p ro p ria te instructional m aterials, classro o m
u tiliz e a v a rie ty o f com m u n ity-b a sed h e a lth presentations, discussions, d e m o n stratio n s, an d
c a re fa c ilitie s to supplem ent, b u t n o t replace. sup erv ised clinical practice.
s tu d e n t experiences in the p r im a r y c lin ic a l set- jnc,udes clear,v cour5<_ svi|;lbj (h3c
ting. These settings m a y include sp o rts m e d i- d„ cnb(. |earning objectjves a n d c o m p eten cies
c ,n e clinics, p h ysica l therapy a n d /o r reb a b ilita - tQ .,chi<:ved for bo n , d id actic an d sup erv ised
tio n d im e s , college o r u n iversity h ealth d jm ca! education com ponents.
centers, h o s p ita l em ergency room s, p h y sic ia n s *
offices, o r o th e r appropriate health care fa c ilities. < = - docu m en ts frequent o o lu a tio n o f s tu d e n ts to
assess th e ir acquisition o f k n o w ledge, p ro b lem
P r a c titio n e r c o m p ete n c e s sh ould p r o v id e th e identification and problem solving skills, a n d psv-
b a s is fo r d e riv in g the objectives a n d a c tiv itie s c h o m o to r behavioral. and clinical c o m p e te n c e s.
c o n s titu tin g th e program 's c u rricu lu m . B oth
A. P ro g ra m a n d S p o nsoring In s titu tio n
R e s p o n s ib ilitie s
1 . A p p ly in g fo r A ccred itatio n
T h e accred itatio n review process c o n d u cted hy
th e C o m m ittee on Allied Health Education and
A ccreditation (CAHEA) can be initiated o n ly at
th e w ritten request o f the chief executive o ffi
c e r o r an officially designated representative o f
th e sp o n so rin g institution.
Thi> process is initiated bv requesting an a p p li
c atio n form from and returning it to the
D iv is io n o f A llied H e a lth E d u c a tio n
a n d A c c re d ita tio n
A m erican Medical Association
515 N orth S ate Street
C hicago. Illinois 60610
An in stitu tio n sponsoring a program m av v o lu n
tarily w ith d ra w from the CAHEA accreditation
system at any time.
2 . A d m in is tra tiv e R sq u iro m sn ts for
M a in ta in in g A ccred itatio n
To m aintain a cc red ia tio n . th e following actions
a re required:
a . T he program m ust submit a S elf-S tu d y R e p o r t
o r a req u ire d progress report w ithin a reasonable
p e rio d o f tim e, as determ ined by the JRC-AT.
b . T h e p rogram must agree to a reasonable site
visit d ate befo re the end of th e p en u d for
w hich a ccred itatio n was awarded.
c. T h e program m ust inform th e JRC-AT w ith in
a reasonable p eriod o f tim e o f changes in re
q uired program personnel.
d . T h e sponsoring institution m ust inform
CAHEA and ih c JRC-AT o f its in te n t to tran sfer
program sponsorship, tn accord w ith CAHEA
polio*
c. The program and th e spo n so rin g in stitu tio n
m ust pay JRC-AT fees w ithin a reasonable p e
rio d o f tim e, as determ ined by th e JRC-AT.
f. T h e sponsoring institution m ust prom pclv in
form CAHEA and the JRC-AT o f any adverse d e
cision affecting its accreditation o r o th e r s p e
cialty recognition status.
Failure to m eet these adm inistrative req u ire
m ents fo r m aintaining a c c re d ia tio n m ay lead to
being placed on probation and ultim ately to
having a cc re d ia tio n w ithdraw n.
B. CAHEA a n d JRC-AT R e s p o n s ib ilitie s
1. A d m in iste rin g tfis A c c re d ita tio n Rovfow
P r e c s s s
a . At th e w ritten request o f th e c h ie f ex ecutive
o fficer o r o th e r officially d esignated re p resen ta
tive. CAHEA and the JRC-AT assess an ap p lican t
program 's relative com pliance w ith th e
E s s e n tia ls .
S ection III:
M aintaining and
A dm inistering
A ccreditation
7
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
S ection III
co n tin u ed
T he a ccred iatio n review p ro cess includes an
on-suc evaluation o f th e p ro g ram . U' th e p e rfo r
m ance o f a site visit team is unacceptable, th e
institution may request a se c o n d site visit.
Before the JRC-AT form ulates its a c c re d ia tio n
recom m endation to CAHEA. th e sp o n so rin g in
stitution is given an o p p o rtu n ity to c o m m e n t tn
w riting o n th e rep o rt o f th e site visit team and
to correct factual errors.
b . Before transm itting a rec o m m e n d atio n fo r
Probationary A ccred iatio n to CAHEA. th e JRC-
AT provides th e sp o n so rin g in stitu tio n w ith an
o p p o rtu n ity to request re c o n sid eratio n o f th e
recom m endation. R econsideration is b ased on
conditions existing w hen th e JRC-AT a rriv ed at
its recom m endation to CAHEA and o n su b se
quent docum ented evidence o f correc te d d efi
ciencies provided by th e a p p lican t.
c. CAHEA awards o f P ro b atio n ary A c cred ia tio n
are final and are n o t subject to appeal.
2 . W ithholding o r W ith d ra w in g A c c re d ita tio n
a . Before recom m ending to CAHEA th a t ac
cre d ia tio n be w ithheld o r w ith d ra w n , th e JRC-
AT provides th e sp onsoring in stitu tio n w ith an
o pp o rtu n ity to request reco n sid eratio n . CAHEA
decisions to w ith h o ld o r w ith d ra w a c c re d ia
tion m ay be ap p ea le d . A c o p y o f th e CAHEA
A ppeals P rocedures fo r A c cred ia tio n VHthheld
o r VClthdrawn acco m p an ies th e letter notifying
th e sp o n so rin g in s titu tio n o f o n e o f th ese ac
tions. W h en a c c re d ia tio n is w ith d ra w n , th e in
stitu tio n al s p o n s o r’ s c h ie f executive officer b
provided w ith a c le a r statem en t o f each d efi
ciency in th e program 's relative com pliance
w ith th e E s s e n tia ls an d is in fo rm ed th at appli
cation fo r a c c re d ia tio n as a n ew applicant may
be m ad e w h e n ev e r th e pro g ram considers itself
to be in c o m p lian ce w ith th e E s s e n tia ls ,
b. All stu d en ts w h o have successfully com plet
ed a program gran ted any a c c re d ia tio n status at
any p o in t d u rin g th e ir e n ro llm e n t arc regarded
as graduates o f a CAHEA-accredited program .
3. In a c tlv * P r o g ra m s
a. T h e sp o n so rin g in stitu tio n m ay request in ac
tive status fo r a pro g ram th a t docs n o t enroll
students fo r u p to tw o years. T h e program and
its sp o n so rin g in stitu tio n m u st co n tin u e to pay
requtred an n u al fees.
b. Should a pro g ram be inactive for tw o years
and n o t be reactiv ated , it w ilt be considered
discontinued an d a c c re d ia tio n w ill b e w ithdraw n.
8
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Appendix B
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
118
i
Case Study Interview Topics
Institution Sponsorship
1. Was the athletic training education program “approved" by the NATAPEC before your
decision to pursue or not pursue CAAHEP accreditation at the end o f the NATA approval
period.
2. How was the decision made to pursue or not pursue CAAHEP accreditation?
3. Indicate the personnel involved in the decision making process.
4. How the decision to pursue or not pursue CAAHEP accreditation positively or negatively
effect personnel (program director, clinical instructor, other instructional faculty, team
physician, medical and allied health personnel), financial resources, physical resources,
students.
Resources
Personnel
1. Describe the relationship between the academic and clinical segments of the athletic training
education program.
2. Describe your role and relationship to the athletic training education program.
3. What type o f academic and clinical responsibilities do you have in the athletic training
education program?
4. Explain the effect the change in certification requirements for athletic trainers and athletic
training education in year 2004 will have on your current program?
Administrative Personnel
1. Describe the leadership and management structure of your NAT APEC approved ''curriculum''
athletic training education program prior to the decision to pursue or not pursue CAAHEP
accreditation.
2. Describe your athletic training education program leadership and management after the
decision to pursue or not pursue CAAHEP accreditation.
3. What needs must be anticipated to pursue or maintain CAAHEP accreditation-from the
clinical perspective?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
4. What factors are necessary for your athletic training education to pursue or maintain
CAAHEP accreditation from an academic perspective?
Instructional Personnel
1. Did your athletic training education program have full time academic teaching faculty prior to
the decision to pursue or not pursue CAAHEP accreditation?
2. If the athletic training education program had full time academic teaching faculty prior to the
decision to pursue or not pursue CAAHEP accreditation, what type o f teaching appointment
did the individual(s) have.
3. In your opinion, what is the minimum academic faculty needed to effectively sustain a
successful athletic training education program at your institution?
4. What needs must be anticipated to pursue or maintain CAAHEP accreditation from the
clinical perspective?
5. What factors are necessary for your athletic training education to pursue or main rain
CAAHEP accreditation from an academic perspective?
Other Instructional Staff
Medical and Allied Health Personnel
Financial Resources
Physical Resources
Facilities
Equipment and Supplies
Learning Resources
Students
Admission Policies and Procedures
Fvaluation o f Students
’ ’-Health
^-Guidance
Operational Policies
Fair Practices
Student Records
Philosophy
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Political Implications
Department
1. The Department’s academic program contains other degree specializations besides athletic
training. Do you feel the need (faculty, financial resources, physical resources) o f these
programs limits the ability to meet the full expectations of accreditation.
2. Does your Department’s academic program have any other programs with accreditation
requirements? If yes, please describe.
Faculty
Instiniuon
Profession
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
121
Appendix C
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
122
i
Survey of Program Characteristics of
CAAHEP Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs
Please provide the appropriate information and/or best answer for each question. The information provided will
be kept anonymous and confidential. All responses should be legible.
Administrative Structure
1. Does your athletic training education program have a Program Director?
Yes No
2 . Does your athletic training education program have a Coordinator o f Academic Education?
Yes No
If yes, is this person different from the Program Director?
Yes No
3. Does your athletic training education program have an Coordinator of Clinical Education?
Yes No
If yes. is this person different from the Program Director? Yes No
If yes. is this person different from the Coordinator of Academic Education? Y es NO
If yes. is this person in the academic unit? Yes No
Tf no. what department is this person located in?_______________
4. Does your athletic training education program have an advisory group composed of allied health professionals
from the r n m m im fryt
Yes No
5. Does your athletic training education program have a formal “Vision" statement.
Y es. No
6. Does you athletic training education program have a formal “Mission" statement.
Yes No
7. Does your athletic training education program link the segments of didactic and clinical learning?
Yes No
Is there communication between the two segments?
Yes No
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
123
8. Does your athletic training education, program integrate relevant didactic and clinical experiences (ie. What is
taught in didactic and experienced in clinical at the same time.).
Yes No
9. Does your state have athletic training regulation?
Yes N 'o
If yes. indicate the type of regulation?
Licensure
Certification
Registration
Exemption
10. If your state has athletic training regulation, indicate the year the regulation was implemented.
19_____
11. Was your athletic training education program previously-approved by the NATAPEC as an "Curriculum'
program.
Yes No
If yes. indicate the initial year your athletic training education program was “approved".
19______•
12. Indicate the year your athletic training education program received CAAHEP accreditiation.
19______*
13. Indicate the type of organizational culture that best describes your athletic training education program.
Collegial (Consensus, teamwork, and participation in most decisions by colleagues.)
Personalistic (Colleague independence in decision making and problem solving.)
Formalistic (Chain of command is clearly defined with emphasis on policy, procedure, and ruies.)
Other Define:_
14. Indicate the type of organization structure that best represents your athletic training education
program.
Work is divided among colleagues according to expertise.
Work is divided among colleagues according to the types of work or services being provided.
Work is divided among colleagues according to expertise and/or according to the types of work
or services being provided.
Other Define:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
124
15. Indicate the type o f clinical supervisory model utilized for student athletic trainers clinical experience.
Clinical experience emphasizes the development o f a list o f specific performance goals to
accomplish during that segment of the clinical experience.
Clinical experience utilizes direct observation with emphasis on correcting performance
weaknesses.
Clinical experience emphasizes supervisor/student athletic trainer collaboration of goals for
personal growth.
16. What type o f evaluation methods are used to assess student(s) competence in didactic material? Indicate the
percent o f your didactic evaluations that are based on each of the following methods (ie. What percent o f the
the evaluations are based on objective tests, on patient management programs, etc.?). Percents should add
to 100%.
Written patient management problems
Computer-based simulations (test only)
Computer-based simulations (videodiscs)
Computer-based simulations (multimedia interactive)
Standardized patients/performance test
Direct observation of performance
Objective Tests (All forms)
Essay Tests
Critical incident report
Other Define: _____________
17. Check the methods of evaluation that are used to assess a student’s clinical activities.
Written patient management problems
Computer-based simulations (test only)
Computer-based simulations (videodiscs)
Computer-based simulations (multimedia interactive)
Standardized patients
Direct observation of performance
Objective Tests (All forms)
Essay Tests
Critical incident report
Other Define: _______________
18. What is the total number of athletic training faculty (full time and part time) on academic appointment?
full time faculty part time faculty
19. Of the athletic training faculty, how m any are full time academic appointments?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
125
20. O f the athletic training faculty on full time academic appointments, indicate how many have the following
type o f appointments.
Tenured
Tenure Track
21. O f the athletic training faculty on academic appointments, indicate how many have the following
type of appointments.
Lecturer
Part time
22. What percent of the full time academic athletic training faculty have assignments/clinical responsibilities in
intercollegiate athletics?
%
On the average what percentage o f their academic work load is related to clinical responsibility?_____
What percentage of their clinical responsibilities is related to:
student supervision
athletic health care
23. How m any NATA certified athletic trainers are employed full time in intercollegiate athletics'?
24. How many NATA certified athletic trainers are employed pan time in intercollegiate athletics'?
25. Do any o f the athletic trainers in intercollegiate athletics have teaching responsibilities in the athletic training
education program?
Yes _____ No
If yes. how: many?_____
Are the teaching responsibilities pan o f their intercollegiate athletics work load?
Yes No
If yes. on the average, what percentage of their athletic appointment is instructional?
%
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
126
5
26. Is the athletic training Program Director on a full time tenured/tenure track academic appointment'.'
Yes No
If no, what type o f appointment does the Program Director hold?
27. Indicate the Department academic unit the athletic training education program is housed in (e.g.. Biology.
Kinesiology, Health Science)?
28. Indicate the type o f College/School academic unit the Department is housed in (e.g.. College of Health and
Human Services, College o f Natural Sciences. School o f Education)?
29. In the chain o f command, to whom does the athletic training Program Director report (e.g.. Chair. DeanV?
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
127
6
B iographical D ata
1. Does your athletic training education program have qualifying criteria for admission.
Yes _____ No
If yes, please indicate all criteria used for admission?
Application, Personal interview. Observation experience,
Active participation experience, Cumulative grade point average.
Grade point average in specific courses. Letters of Recommendation
2. Does the Academic Department that houses the Athletic Training Program have a Department academic
requirement that a student must earn a certain GPA in all major course work?
Yes No
If yes. what is the requirement?_____
3. How many undergraduate athletic training majors are officially enrolled in your Athletic Training Education
Program.
athletic training majors
4. Indicate the percentage of male and female students in the undergraduate athletic training education program.
% male _____ % female
5. How many areas of undergraduate specialization/degrees are in the Academic Department that houses the
Athletic Training Program- ’
areas of specialization degrees
6. What is the total number of full time faculty in the academic Department that houses the athletic train in g
education program.
faculty
7. What is the total number o f undergraduate majors in the academic Department that houses the athletic
training education program.
majors
8. Indicate the size of your institution’s student population.
students
9. Indicate the age of your institution.
years
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
C ertification D ata
1. Have your CAAHEP accredited athletic training students participated in the NATABOC certification
examination?
Yes No
2. Did 5 or more CAAHEP accredited athletic training students participate in the NATABOC certification
examination in 1997?
Yes No
I f yes. indicate the overall passing rate percentage for your athletic training students on the N A T A
Board o f Certification - Athletic Trainer’s Certification Examination in 1997.
%
If yes. indicate the passing rate for your athletic training students on the following subcomponents of
the NATA Board of Certification - Athletic Trainer’s Certification Examination in 1997.
Written % Practical % Simulation %
3. Did 5 or more CAAHEP accredited athletic training students participate in the NATABOC certification
examination in 1998?
Yes No
If yes. indicate the overall passing rate percentage for your athletic training students on the NATA
Board o f Certification - Athletic Trainer’s Certification Examination in 1998.
If yes. indicate the passing rate for your athletic training students on the following subcomponents of
the NATA Board of Certification - Athletic Trainer's Certification Examination in 1998.
Written % Practical % Simulation %
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
129
Appendix D
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
130
Accredited Athletic Training Education Program
Commission on Accreditation o f Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP)
A LABAM A CO LO RADO
Christopher Gillespie, MEd
Samford University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept o f Exercise Science & Sports Medicine
Box 292448
Birmingham, AL 35229
John H. Anderson. MS
Troy State University
Athletic Training Education Program
Coflegeview Building
Troy, AL 36082
Deidre Leaver-Dunn. PhD
The University o f Alabama
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Professional Studies
Tuscaloosa. AL 35487-0312
CALIFORNIA
Alice McLaine. MS
California State University, Northridge
Athletic Training Education Program
Department o f Kinesiology
Northridge. CA 91330-8287
Rebecca Crumpton. EdD
California State University, Fresno
Athletic Training Education Progam
Dept, o f P.E. & Human Performance
Fresno, CA 93740-8018
Doris E. Flores. MS
California State University, Sacramento
Athletic T ra in in g Education Program
Dept, o f HPE
Sacramento. CA 95819-2694
Shannon Courtney, MA
University o f Northern Colorado
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Kinesiology & PE
Greeley, CO 80639
CO NNECTICUT
Sharon Misasi, PhD
S. Connecticut State University
Athletic T ra in in g Education Program
P.E. Dept.
501 Crescent Street
New Haven. CT 06515
DELAWARE
Keith A. Handling, MS
University o f Delaware
Athletic T rain in g Education Program
P.E. Dept.
Newark. DE 19716
FLORIDA
Carl R. Cramer, EdD
Barry University
Sports Medicine/Athletic Training
11300 N.E. 2nd Avenue
Miami Shores, FL 33161 -6695
Mary Susan Guyer, MSEd
Stetson University
Athletic Training Education Program
421 North Woodland Boulevard, Unit 8359
Deland. FL 32720-3770
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Douglas M. Kleiner, PhD
University o f North Florida
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Health Science
4567 St. Johns BlufFRoad South
Jacksonville, FL 32224-2645
G EORGIA
Michele Garber, MS
Valdosta St. University
Sports Medicine
Valdosta, GA 31698
IDAHO
John McChesney, ATC, PhD
Boise St. University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Health. P i . & Recreation
Boise, ID 83725
ILLINOIS
Rob Doyle, PhD
Eastern Illinois University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f P.E. & Athletics
Charleston. IL 61920
Sally Rouse Perkins, MS
Southern Illinois University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f P.E.
Carbondale. EL 62901
Gerald W. Bell, EdD
University o f Illinois
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Kinesiology
Urbana. EL 61801-3895
INDIANA
Steve Risinger, MA
Anderson University
Athletic Training Education Program
Anderson, IL 46012-1362
Thomas Weidner, PhD
Ball State University
Athletic T rain in g Education Program
E)ept. of PJE. &HP, # 209
Munrie. IN 47306
Mark Merrick. PhD
Indiana State University
Undergraduate Athletic T rain in g Program
Arena Room C-49
Terre Haute, IN 47809
Katie Grove, PhD
Indiana University
Athletic T rain in g Education Program
Sports Medicine Dept.
Assembly Hall
1001 East 17“ Street
Bloomington, EN 47408-1590
Larry Lever enz. PhD
Purdue University HKILS
Athletic T rain in g Education Program
West Lafayette, IN 47907
IOWA
Dan Foster, PhD
University of Iowa
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, of Ex. Science & P.E.
Iowa City, IA 52242-1020
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
132
KANSAS
James (Jim) 'Whalen, MS Ed
Kansas State University
Athletic Training Education Program
2201 Kimball Avenue
Manhattan, KS 66502
KENTUCKY
Sue Geesey-Jean, MS
East Kentucky University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Physical Education
Richmond, KY 40475-3 L03
MARYLAND
James R. Scifers, MPT. ATC
Program Director
Athletic Training Education Program
Salisbury State University
1101 Camden Avenue
Salisbury, MD 21801
MASSACHUSETTS
Sara Brown. MS
Director. Athletic Training Program
Boston University
Sargent College ofHealth and Rehabilitation
Services
Dept, o f Physical Therapy
Boston, MA 02215
Marcia Anderson, PhD
Bridgewater State College MAHPLS
Athletic Training Education Program
Bridgewater, MA 02325
Deborah S wanton. MEd
Endicott College
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, of Sports Science & Fitness Studies
376 Hale Street
Beverly, MA 01915
Bonneta Schreck, MEd
Salem College
Athletic T raining Education Program
Dept, of Sport Fitness & Leisure Studies
352 Lafayette Street
Salem, MA 01970
Charles Redmond, MED/MSPT
Springfield College
Athletic T raining Education Program
Dept, o f P.E. & Health Fitness
Springfield, MA 01109
MICHIGAN
David A. Kaiser, EdD
Central Michigan University
Sports Medicine Curriculum/Rose 145
Dept o f P.E.
Mount Pleasant. MI 48859
Ron M. Venis, MS
Eastern Michigan University
Athletic T raining Education Program
Dept. ofHPERD
235 Warner Building
Ypsilanti. MI 48197
Deborah Springer. MA
Grand Valley State University
Athletic T raining Education Program
Dept, of P.E. & Athletics
One Campus Drive, 83 Fieldhouse
Allendale, MI 49401
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
I JO
Richard Ray, EdD
Hope College
Athletic Training Program
Dow Center
Holland, M I 49423
M INNESO TA
Gary D. Reinholtz. MA
Gustavus Adolphus College
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept. ofPJE.
800 West College Avenue
St Peter, M N 56082
Patrick Sexton, MS
Minnesota State University, Mankato
Athletic Training Education Program
MSU Box 28, Box 8400
Mankato, M N 56002-8400
M ISSISSIPPI
James B. Gallaspy, MEd
University o f Southern Mississippi
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Human Performance & Recreation
Hattiesburg. MS 39406-5142
M ISSO URI
Paul A Ballard, EdD
Southeast Missouri State University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept. O f Health & Leisure
Cape Girardeau, MO 63701
Karen Toburen. EdD
Southwest Missouri State University
Sports Medicine & Athletic Training
160 Professional Building, SMSU
901 South National Avenue
Springfield. MO 65804-0089
MONTANA
Scott Richter, EdM
University o f Montana
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept. O f Health & Human Performance
McGill Hall 126
Misoula, MT 59812-1055
NEW HAM PSHIRE
Julie N. Bemier, EdD
Plymouth State College
Athletic Training Education Program
MSC#22
Plymouth, NH 03264
Daniel R. Sedory, MS
University o f New Hampshire
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept. ofKmesiology
145 Main Street, Field House
Durham. NH 03824
NEW JERSEY
Gary Bail, EdD
Kean College o f New Jersey
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, of P.E.
Union. NJ 07083
David Middleman, MA
William Paterson College, N J
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Movement Science
Wayne. NJ 07470
NEW MEXICO
Leah Putman, MS
New Mexico State University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, of P.E., Recreation & Dance
Las Cruces, NM 88003-0001
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
134
David Montalongo, MS
University o f New Mexico
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f P.E.
South Athletic Complex
Athletic Training Room
Albuquerque, NM 87131
N EW Y ORK
Pete Koehneke, MS
Canisius College
Chair, Sports Medicine & Exercise Science
Buffalo, NY 14208-1098
Suanne S Maurer, MS
Hofstra University
Athletic Training Education Program
Hempstead, NY 11550
Kent Scriber, EdD
Ithaca College
Athletic T raining Education Program
Dept. O f Exercise & Sports Science
1100 Hill Center
Ithaca. NY 14850
John Cottone. EdD
St. University o f New York at Cortland
Athletic T raining Education Program
Dept, o f P.E. & Recreation
Cortland. NY 13045
N O RTH CAROLINA
Jamie Moul, EdD
Appalachian State University
Athletic T r aining Education Program
Dept. O f Health Education, PJE. & Leisure
Studies
Boone, NC 28608
Katie Walsh, EdD
East Carolina University
Athletic T raining Education Program
Dept. O f Health Education
Greenville, NC 27858-4353
Rick Proctor, MAT
High Point University
Sports Medicine Program
University Station, Montheu Avenue
High Point, NC 27262
Kevin Gusldewicz
University of North Carolina
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f PEESS
211 Fetzer Gymnasium
Chapel H21. NC 27599-8700
NORTH DAKOTA
Elise Erickson, MS
North Dakota State University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f health. P.E. & Recreation
Fargo. ND 58105-5600
Tim McCrory, Med
University of Mary
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f P.E.
7500 Bismarck. ND 58504
Jim Rudd. MS
University ofNorth Dakota
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Sports Medicine
P.O. Box 9013
Grand Forks. ND 58202-9013
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
135
OHIO
Bonnie Goodwin. MS
Capital University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Health Sc Sport Sciences
Troutman Hall
2199 E. Main
Columbus, OH 43209
Paul Spear, MS
Marietta College
Athletic Training Education Pro gam .
Dept, o f Sports Medicine
215 Fifth Street
Marietta, OH 45750-3058
Patricia Troesch, MA
Miami University of Ohio
Athletic Training Education Program
PHS
Dept, o f PEHSS
Oxford, OH 45056
Dan Gorman
Mount Union College
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, of Health, PJE. Sc Sports Mgmt.
Alliance, OH 44601
Michelle Glon. MS
Ohio Nothem University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept. ofHPESS
#170 Sports Center
Ada, OH 45810
Jim Rankin, PhD
University o f Toledo
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Health Promotion Sc Human
Performance
2801 West Bancroft Street
Toledo, OH 43606
OKLAHOMA
Greg Gardner, EdD
University of Tulsa
Athletic Training Education Program
School ofNursing
600 South College Avenue
Tulsa, OK 74104-3189
OREGON
Rod Harter, PhD
Oregon State University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, of Exercise Science Sc Sport Sciences
228 Langton Hall
Corvallis. OR 97331-3302
PENNSYLVANIA
Bruce D. Barnhart, EdD
California University o f Pennsylvania
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept. Of Health Science Sc Sport Studies
250 University Avenue
California, PA 15419
Paula Turocy, EdD
Duquesne University
Athletic Training
119 Health Sciences Building
Pittsburgh, PA 15282
John Thatcher, MEd
East Stroudsburg University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, of Movement Studies Sc Exercise
Science
East Stroudsburg, PA 18301
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
136
Dave Tomasi
Lock Haven University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Health Sciences
114 Himes Hall
Lock Haven, PA 17745
Bradley Jacobson, MA
Mercyhurst College
Sports Medicine
501 East 38* Street
Erie. PA 16546
Edwin “Sandy" Bush. MS
Messiah College
Sports Medicine
501 East 38* Street
Grantham, PA 17027
Craig Denegar, PhD
Pennsylvania State University
Athletic Training Education Progam
Dept, o f Kinesiology
University Park, PA 16802
Bonnie J. Siple. MS, ATC
Slippery Rock University
Athletic Training Education Program
Athletic Health
Slippery Rock. PA 16057
Michael Sitler, EdD
Temple University
Athletic Training Education Program
Pearson Hall
Dept, o f P.E. S c . Dance
Philadelphia, PA 19122
Kathleen A. Swanik. PhD
University o f Pittsburgh. HPER
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f HPER
104 Trees Hall
Pittsburgh. PA 15261
Cheryl Ferris, MEd, Program Director
Waynes burg College
Dept, of Sports Medicine
Waynesburg, PA 15370
Carolyn Jimenez, MS
West Chester University
Dept o f Sports Medicine
215 South Campus
West Chester, PA 19383
SOUTH CAROLINA
Malissa Martin. MEd
University o f South Carolina
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f P i .
Blatt P. E. Center
Columbia. SC 29208
SOUTH DAKOTA
Jim Boo her, PhD
South Dakota State University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept. O f Health. P.E. S c . Recreation
Brookings. SD 57007-1497
TENNESSEE
T. Kyle Eubank. MA
Lipscomb University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Health. PE . & Exercise Science
Nashville. TN 37204-3951
TEXAS
Bobby Patton. EdD
Southwest Texas State University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept of Health, P.E. S c . Recreation
Jowers Center. 601 University Drive
San Marcos. TX 78666-4616
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
T. Ross Bailey, Med
Texas Christian University
Athletic Training Education Program
HPER/Athletics
TCU Box 297600
Fort Worth, TX 76129-3292
U T A H
Gaye Merrill, MS
Brigham Young University
Athletic T rain in g Education Program
College o f P.E. & Sports
116-B Richards Building
Provo, UT 84602-2111
VERM O NT
Denise Alosa, MS
University of Vermont
College of Education
Sports Therapy/Patrick Gymnasium
Burlington. VT 05405
VIRGINIA
Hebert Amato, DA
James Madison University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Health Science
MSC-4007
Harrisonburg, VA 22807
W ASH ING TON
Carol ZweifeL MS
Washington State University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Kinesiology & Leisure Studies
PEB 104
Pullman. WA 99164-1410
W EST VIRGINIA
Dan Martin. EdD
Marshall University
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, o f Health. P.E. & Recreation
400 Hal Greer Boulevard
Huntington, WV 25755
Vince Stilger, HSD
West Virginia University
Athletic Training Education Program
School o f Physical Education
P.O. Box 6 1 16-Coliseum
Morgantown, WV 26506-6116
Christine Lauber, MA
University o f Charleston
Athletic Training Department
2300 MacCorkle Avenue, Southeast
Charleston. W V 25304
WISCONSIN
Mark Gibson. MS
University o f Wisconsin. LaCrosse
Athletic Training Education Program
Dept, of Exercise & Sports Science
134 Mitchell Hall
LaCrosse, WI 54601
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Appendix E
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
C A L IFO R N IA . STATE U N IV E R SIT Y . L O N G BEACH
KINESIOLOGY i PHYSICAL ED U C A TIO N
April 29.1999
Dear Colleague:
For the past 20 years [ have been the Program Director o f Athletic Training Education at
California State University, Long Beach. I am completing requirements for a Doctorate in
Education in the specialization area o f Leadership for Higher and Adult Education. I am
requesting assistance from all CAAHEP Program Directors.
My dissertation topic incorporates two methodologies. A case study methodology which
investigates administrative differences of a former NATAPEC approved '•curriculum” program
compared with a CAAHEP-accredited program and a survey methodology which seeks to identuy
the program characteristics o f CAAHEP accredited programs. This data should provide
information regarding differences in athletic naming education administrative structure,
institutional need, faculty need, and faculty or program development. Please note the enclosed
survey does not address educational reforrn.
The enclosed survey takes approximate 20 minutes to complete To assure the data is completely
ar.onvmotis and confidential, the survey does not request any faculty or institutional identifying
information. Please return the survey in the enclosed self addressed ana stamped envelope by May
•0. 1999 Since the survey is completely anonymous and confidential, a self addressed and
stamped post card with your institution's name is enclosed in order to have a record of the maior
and percent o f survey return. Please mail the post card separately from your survey to maintain
anonymity and confidentiality.
Your participation and assistance in this task are appreciated. Please feei free to contact me by
telephone at 562-985-4669 for questions or a copy of the results in the abstract form.
Sincerelv.
Keith W. Freesemann. ATC
cc: Dr. Kaaren Hoffman
University of Southern California
S O SiLLFLC'.v .AUC - C n C 3 £ aC H . C a LIFOS--.:.*. i o i a c -a a c:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Appendix F
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
141
June 03. 1999
Dear Colleague:
Approximately May 03, 1999 all CAAHEP Program Directors received a letter and a survey
requesting their assistance in identifying program characteristics of CAAHEP-accredited
programs. The survey is related to my dissertation topic for completion of a Doctorate in
Education in the specialization area o f Leadership in Higher and Adult Education.
As o f this date, my records show the post card signifying completion o f the survey from your
institution has not been returned. Please complete and return the survey and the postcard before
June 10. 1999. If the survey has been discarded, please notify me at the above email address and
an additional copy will be sent by mail immediately
Your participation and assistance in this task are appreciated. Please feel free to contact me by
telephone at 562-985-4669 for questions.
Sincerely.
Keith W. Freesemann. ATC
Program Coordinator. Athletic T raining Education
California State University. Long Beach
cc: Dr. Kaaren Hoffinan
University of Southern California
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Appendix G
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
143
C A L IF O R N IA STA TE U N IV E R SIT Y . L O N G B E A C H
K IN E SIO L O G Y Sl PHYSICAL EDUCATION
June 21, 1999
Second Request
Dear Colleague:
For the past 20 years I have been, the Program Director o f Athletic Training Education at
California State University, Long Beach. I am completing requirements for a Doctorate in
Education in the specialization area o f Leadership for Higher and Adult Education. I am
requesting assistance from all CAAHEP Program Directors.
My dissertation topic incorporates two methodologies. A case study methodology which
investigates administrative differences o f a former NATAPEC approved "curriculum" program
compared with a CAAHEP-accredited program and a survey methodology which seeks to identity
the program characteristics of CAAHEP accredited programs. This data should provide
information regarding differences in athletic training education administrative structure,
institutional need, faculty need, and faculty o r program development. Please note the enclosed
survey does not address educational reform.
The enclosed survey takes approximate 20 minutes :c complete To assure the data is complete:’ . -
anonymous and confidential, the survey does not request any faculty or institutional identifying
information. Please return the survey in the enclosed self addressed and stam ped envelope
by July 06, 1999. Since the survey is completely anonymous and confidential, a self addressed
and stamped post card with your institution’s name is enclosed in order to have a record of che
percent of survey return. Please mail the post card separately from your survey to maintain
anonymity and confidentiality.
Your participation and assistance in this task are appreciated. Please feel free to contact me by
telephone at 562-985-4669 for questions or a copy of the results in the abstract form.
Sincerely,
Keith W. Freesemann. ATC
cc: Dr. Kaaren Hoffm an
University of Southern California
ItS O S E U F L O W E S iO 'J L E V A R O • L O N G 3 E .\C :-i. C A L IF O R N IA 9 0 8 - t O - l ’JOt
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
144
Appendix H
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
145
Tree-NUD»EST
Background
Institution Type
Internship
CAAHEP
Interviewee’s
Internship
Program Director
Head Athletic Trainer
Department Chair/Dean
CAAHEP
Program Director
Head Athletic Trainer
Department Chair/Dean
History
Impact o f Decision.
Institution/Program Support
Resources
Personnel
Program Director
Instructional Personnel - Athletic Training
Instructional Staff - Athletic Training
Athletic Staff
Medical and Allied Health Personnel
Personnel Organization Structure in Athletic Training
Personnel Organization in Home Department
Personnel Interaction
Financial Resources
Academic Department
Athletic Department
Physical Resources
Facilities
Equipment and Supplies
Learning Resources
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Students
Home Department
Admission Policies and Procedures
Evaluation o f Students
Curriculum
Obstacles
Personal Value/Importance
Political Implications
Department
Faculty
Institution
Profession
Professional Value/Importance
Strategic Avenues
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
< 3 .° °
V>
< P
\S >
Appendix I
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
149
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
States with CAAHEP accredited athletic training education programs.
Reproduced with permission o f th e copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
MA
I
I
In
PACIFIC
OCEAN
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
Mexico
The United States
^Cooyr'ght © 2000 Houghton M lfin Conpany. All Rights Roscwod.
States with CAAHEP accredited programs responding to the survey.
t-h
o
151
Commission on accreditation o f Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP)
Accredited Athletic Training Education Programs
Program Distribution and Survey Response per State
State Programs Responses State Programs Responses
Alabama 3 5 Oregon 1 0
Alaska 0 Pennsylvania 12 4
Arizona 0 Rhode Island
Arkansas 0 South Carolina 1 0
California 3 0 South Dakota 1 1
Colorado 1 0 Tennessee 1 0
Connecticut 1 0 Texas
2
Delaware 1 1 Utah 1 0
Florida 3
2
Vermont 1 0
Georgia 1 0 Virginia 1 1
Hawaii 0 Washington 1 1
Idaho 1 0 West Virginia o 2
Illinois 3 2 Wisconsin 1 1
Indiana 5 5 Wyoming 0
Iowa 1 1
Kansas 1 0
Kentucky 1 0
Louisiana 0
Maine 0
Maryland 1 1
Massachusetts 5 4
Michigan 4 4
Minnesota 2 1
Mississippi 1 0
Missouri 2 2
Montana 1 0
Nebraska 0
Nevada 0
New Hampshire 2 2
New Jersey 2 2
New Mexico 2 2
New York 4 4
North Carolina 4 2
North Dakota o 2
Ohio 6 4
Oklahoma 1 0
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A study of the Navy College Program for Afloat College Education: Implications for teaching and learning among nontraditional college students

PDF

China's critical educational access demand and United States higher education distance learning curriculum: An answer?

PDF

An examination of the contract education program in a multi-college community college district in Southern California: A descriptive and qualitative case study investigation

PDF

Associate degree nursing students' perceptions of caring ability, parental care and nursing school climate: A quantitative and qualitative study of caring links among first semester nursing stud...

PDF

International students: Patterns of success

PDF

"Home boy" to "school boy": Inside the PowerBuilders Workshops at CSULA. A qualitative examination of access, mobility, and leadership qualities of minorities in higher education

PDF

An examination of the factors that affect education vs non-education career choices of Asian Pacific Americans in higher education

PDF

Achievement and retention of first-semester nursing students: The effects of a study skills course

PDF

Increasing graduate success on the CAT version of the NCLEX -RN

PDF

Alumni student -athletes' attitudes towards educational philanthropy

PDF

Higher education's responses to economic development: Vietnam

PDF

Improving the transfer rates of minority students: A case study

PDF

Fulfilling the mission to serve the underserved: A case study of a private, Catholic, urban college's two -year program

PDF

Evaluating the California Community Colleges Registry

PDF

Faculty characteristics: What are their relationships with academic outcomes of community college students?

PDF

A cultural study of shared governance at two community colleges

PDF

Community college students and achievement in mathematics: Predictors of success

PDF

Academic, environmental and social integration variables that maximize transfer preparedness for Latino community college students: An application of academic success models to the study of Tran...

PDF

Examining the factors that predict the academic success of minority students in the remedial mathematics pipeline in an urban community college

PDF

Factors influencing academic success of Chinese international students in Los Angeles community colleges

Asset Metadata

Creator Freesemann, Keith Wayne (author)

Core Title An evaluation of select athletic training education programs administration and educational structure

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Education, administration,education, higher,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Hoffman, Kaaren (committee chair), Hagedorn, Linda Serra (committee member), Hitchcock, Maurice (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c16-60653

Unique identifier UC11338304

Identifier 3018000.pdf (filename),usctheses-c16-60653 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 3018000.pdf

Dmrecord 60653

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Freesemann, Keith Wayne

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA