Selectivity of physiotherapist programs in the United States does not differ by institutional funding source or research activity level

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.

Predictors of research productivity among physical therapy programs in the United States: an observational study

“…An institutional culture of research and investment in the students and faculty reflects in increased research productivity [30]. Growth in private, non-research intensive institutions does not appear to add to such productivity [9]. Using the best available evidence is a core pillar of utilizing evidence-based practice in physical therapy, as noted by the APTA [15].…”

“…Given the relationship found in this study, there is concern that the steeper growth in private institutions is not significantly adding to the evidence in physical therapy practice. Riley et al noted that the majority of these new private programs are not housed within research intensive environments [9]. As per CAPTE's position on scholarship, faculty should serve as role models for students and bridge the connection between research and practice [34].…”

“…CAPTE requires a minimum standard for scholarship for faculty within a DPT program that at least 50% of a program's core faculty hold an advanced academic doctoral degree beyond a clinically-based DPT [5]. Beyond CAPTE, scholarly activity is a common program requirement for all academic faculty members used to determine the qualitative strength and ranking of a program [6][7][8][9][10][11]. Scholarly activity refers to much more than traditional research.…”