Selectivity of physiotherapist programs in the United States does not differ by institutional funding source or research activity level.
- Author:
Sean P RILEY
1
;
Kyle COVINGTON
;
Michel D LANDRY
;
Christine MCCALLUM
;
Chalee ENGELHARD
;
Chad E COOK
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords: Accreditation; Licensure; Physical therapy modalities; Students; United States
- MeSH: Accreditation; Classification; Education; Financial Management*; Humans; Licensure; Physical Therapists*; Physical Therapy Modalities; United States*
- From:Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions 2016;13(1):17-
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare selectivity characteristics among institution characteristics to determine differences by institutional funding source (public vs. private) or research activity level (research vs. non-research). METHODS: This study included information provided by the Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education (CAPTE) and the Federation of State Boards of Physical Therapy. Data were extracted from all students who graduated in 2011 from accredited physical therapy programs in the United States. The public and private designations of the institutions were extracted directly from the classifications from the 'CAPTE annual accreditation report,' and high and low research activity was determined based on Carnegie classifications. The institutions were classified into four groups: public/research intensive, public/non-research intensive, private/research intensive, and private/non-research intensive. Descriptive and comparison analyses with post hoc testing were performed to determine whether there were statistically significant differences among the four groups. RESULTS: Although there were statistically significant baseline grade point average differences among the four categorized groups, there were no significant differences in licensure pass rates or for any of the selectivity variables of interest. CONCLUSION: Selectivity characteristics did not differ by institutional funding source (public vs. private) or research activity level (research vs. non-research). This suggests that the concerns about reduced selectivity among physiotherapy programs, specifically the types that are experiencing the largest proliferation, appear less warranted.
