A descriptive study of athletic training education programs based on findings on CAATE Standard H and program evaluations.

摘要

There is limited research that describes the evaluation procedures utilized by Athletic Training Education Programs (ATEP). The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of the process the CAATE member institutions use to assess outcome-based standards in Standard H. This research used a cross-sectional study design. A survey link was sent to the 371 undergraduate and graduate Entry-Level Athletic Training Education Program Directors listed on the CAATE website. An online survey instrument was used to collect information about the key factors involved in the assessment of the CAATE-accredited programs. Descriptive statistics were used to assess program director demographics and program demographics. Frequency responses were used to determine performance on the CAATE Standard H during the most recent accreditation visit and to determine the types of tools used to assess the outcome-based standards in Standard H. BOC exam pass rates were the most frequently used tool to evaluate achievement outcomes relative to educational mission and goals (N = 84, n = 76, f = 90.5%). The most frequently used tool to evaluate achievement outcomes relative to the quality of didactic instruction was academic course performance ( N = 83, n = 65, f = 78.3%). Clinical-instructor evaluations were the most frequently used tool to evaluate achievement outcomes relative to clinical instruction (N = 84, n = 84, f = 100.0%). The results indicated that program directors use similar assessment tools to evaluate outcomes for Standard H. The similarity of the assessment tools may be a factor of the types of materials listed as acceptable for outcome evaluations by the CAATE. The types of materials that the CAATE accredited programs use to evaluate the program are similar to materials reportedly used for accreditation purposes of other allied health fields. Twenty program directors indicated that they had issues with this standard during their last accreditation visit (f = 23.8%). The fact that program directors are still reporting problems with meeting the CAATE Standard H indicates that there is still confusion about what is necessary to meet this standard.