As a continuing ed provider, I'm talking to Florida's AMTA chapter about bringing me down to teach next year. In the process, I'm learning about how much variety there is among how different states understand continuing ed and "hands on". It's down-right absurd at times.
But it makes me re-consider my views on continuing ed. On the one hand....
Continuing ed does not make someone a better MT.
Just attending a class to meet license renewal requirements isn't going to make someone a better MT. Being motivated to actually absorb the info, practice it outside the class, and spend the time really incorporating it into your practice -- that's what makes a better MT. Curiousity and a personal commitment to being a better MT. On the other hand...
Massage schools aren't teaching us everything we need to know.
Even really great schools with long programs can't teach an MT everything. There are a lot of schools that, frankly, aren't even trying hard. They're pushing students through as fast as they can with little regard to their actual competency. Without continuing ed, the market is full of too many barely competent MTs (and I've received work from some of them!). On the other hand....
State's are so erratic (and often unreasonable) in their continuing ed requirements that they're making it harder to actually get smarter.
Maryland used to require every MT to take courses on HIV every two years (but not on other infectious diseases). Georgia (so I've been told) only gives "hands on" credit for the portion of a class where you're actually rubbing someone. So those hours of lecture associated with the rubbing? They don't count for the "hands on" requirements. I'm sure you all could tell me more. On the other hand....
It's a lot of work to develop continuing ed. We wouldn't have the range of choices we have unless the states required continuing ed.
Yes, it's a way to make money. And, yes, there are courses out there that barely deserve to be called "education". But there are also some amazing courses and new courses being offered all the time. We simply wouldn't have so many if there weren't a robust market for them. Rightly or not, making continuing ed a legal requirement builds that market. On the other hand....
Many MTs find themselves running out of courses they're actually interested in, especially after 15 years of practice. Seasoned MTs are forced to take courses they simply aren't interested in to fufill licensing requirements.
I've heard this from a lot of MTs with 15+ years of experience. They've taken the "big" courses they wanted to take, their practice is solid and where they want it to be. They don't want to add another modality and they hate patching together little courses here and there to meet license renewal requirements. On the other hand....
The world of anatomy, physiology, kinesiology, medicine, etc. is always changing. What you learned 10 years ago may no longer be accepted wisdom. Continuing ed provides an avenue for keeping up with these changes.
How to stretch. Fluid intake. Fascia. Muscle movement and strain. Scars. What I learned about these things 13 years ago is not what they're teaching now. Why? Because we've learned new things and had to change our understanding. None of us can rely solely on what we learned in school. Things change. How are you going to keep up? On the other hand....
Well, you get my point. Frankly, I don't know exactly where I stand on the role of continuing ed in our profession. I used to be a full-fledged gung-ho supporter. Ironically, now that I am a continuing ed provider, I'm not so sure.
I'll post this to your FB page as well, but here's my two cents, as an educator myself. Recognizing that one problem is that different states have different requirements and there is only so much that can be done about that (more on that below, however), within each state, couldn't MTs pool their resources and start a database on WHICH courses and educational experiences are valuable and which aren't? Couldn' there be a website, or a section of an existing one, where an individual MT, in say, Virginia, could go and see what others have found valuable? Those classes would be in high demand and the educators and administrators would have great incentive to DO MORE OF THAT. And less of the other thing.
ReplyDeleteIt strikes me there are lots of MTs, and they could be an effective lobbying group for changes at the state level. Which state has the best set of requirements? Which the least desirable and helpful? I'm sure there wouldn't be complete agreement on this, but there would be majority views that could be lobbied for, at the state level. One goal would be to streamline requirements across states, in the direction of the better requirements.
As a non MT who goes to MTs, I wouldn't myself want there to be no continuing ed requirements, but I would want those requirements to be valuable, for the MTs and then ultimately for the client.
Just some ideas.
Those are *great* ideas. It seems like this could happen within our professional societies but it's not something I've heard anyone suggest. Thanks so much for responding!
ReplyDelete