Teresa Beck PhD, CTRS

Andrea King, BSc Rec, MA (pending) CTRS

The Impact of CARTE on the CTRS Practitioner

Presentation can be retrieved at http://www.gvsu.edu/tr/Click on Faculty/Staff link and there is a link at the end of Teresa Beck’s profile

• CARTE stands for Committee on Accreditation of Recreational Therapy Education

• Initiative started by the North Carolina Recreational Therapy Association (NCRTA) in 2008 to investigate the feasibility of an academic accreditation program for recreational therapy in NC.

• NCRTA decided to investigate academic accreditation because of the significant professional need and because the state has nine (9) colleges/universities with degrees/options in RT/TR, four with specific degrees in recreational therapy

• In January 2010, the American Therapeutic Recreation Association (ATRA) completed a comprehensive review of accreditation options for the profession.

• The ATRA Board reviewed the working documents of Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP) - CARTE and reviewed the National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA)/ Committee on Accreditation of Parks, Recreation and Tourism (COAPRT) approach.

• The ATRA Board voted to support CAAHEP as a national accreditation mechanism for recreational therapy education.

What is CARTE?

The mission of CARTE is to promote the highest levels of professional competence of recreational therapists through:•  the development and promotion of professional

preparation standards reflecting the current needs of consumers and practice environments;

• the encouragement of excellence in educational program development; and

• the accreditation of recreational therapy professional preparation programs.

 

Mission of CARTE

• CAAHEP stands for Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs

• CAAHEP is a programmatic postsecondary accrediting agency recognized by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA)• carries out accreditation activities in cooperation with 18

review committees (Committees on Accreditation) with CARTE being one of the review committees

• CAAHEP currently accredits over 2100 entry level education programs in 22 health science professions

http://www.caahep.org/Content.aspx?ID=63

What is CAAHEP?

CARTE Accreditation of an RT program in Higher Education is similar to a health care agency going for accreditation with Accreditation Canada or in the United States with the Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities (CARF) or a hospital going for Joint Commission Accreditation (JCAHO)

A Comparison

• The goal of accreditation is to ensure that education provided by institutions of higher education meet acceptable levels of quality

• Two levels of Accreditation in Higher Education• Institutional • normally applies to an entire institution, indicating that each of an institution's

parts is contributing to the achievement of the institution's objectives, although not necessarily all at the same level of quality. Canadian Universities are not accredited but specific programs can be.

• Association of Universities and Colleges in Canada – “requires institutions to meet strict criteria and adhere to set principles of institutional quality, assurance, that are reaffirmed every 5 years” (www.aucc.ca) . Both Ontario and the Maritime provinces have qualification framework s (Canadian Degree Qualification Framework)

• Examples of institutional regional accrediting bodies in USA are:• North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, The Higher Learning

Commission• New England Association of Schools and Colleges, Commission on Institutions of

Higher Education• Western Association of Schools and Colleges, Accrediting Commission for Senior

Colleges and Universities

US Department of Education: http://www2.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/index.html

What is Accreditation in Higher Education

• Specialized or programmatic • Typically applies to programs, departments, or schools

that are parts of an institution• Most of the specialized or programmatic accrediting

agencies review units within an institution of higher education that is accredited by one of the regional accrediting agencies

• CAAHEP/CARTE is specialized/programmatic accreditation

• OT, Nursing & Medicine are examples of programs accredited in Canada

U.S. Department of Education: http://www2.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/index.html

What is Accreditation in Higher Education (continued)

• A process of reviewing institutions/programs to judge their educational quality (how well are they are serving students and society)

• The result of the process, if successful, the status of “accredited” is awarded to the institution or program

The Value of Higher Education Accreditation (2010). CHEA

A Process and A Status

• Students can have confidence that a degree or credential has value

• Encourages confidence that the educational activities of an accredited program have been found to be satisfactory

• Signals to prospective employers that a student’s educational program has met widely accepted standards

The Value of Accreditation. (June 2010). Council for Higher Education Accreditation

Accreditation Benefits Students

• Confirms that the public presentation of an educational program, student services and graduate accomplishments is fair and accurate

• Promotes accountability through ongoing external evaluation of the program with a finding that there is compliance with general expectations of a professional field as reflected in the accreditation standards

• Identifies programs that have voluntarily undertaken explicit activities directed at improving the quality of the program and carrying them out successfully

The Value of Accreditation. (June 2010). Council for Higher Education Accreditation

Accreditation Benefits the Public

1. Standards: The accrediting agency, in collaboration with educational institutions, establishes standards.

2. Self-study: The institution or program seeking accreditation prepares an in-depth self-evaluation study that measures its performance against the standards established by the accrediting agency.

3. On-site Evaluation: A team selected by the accrediting agency visits the institution or program to determine first-hand if the applicant meets the established standards.

4. Publication: Upon being satisfied that the applicant meets its standards, the accrediting agency grants accreditation or pre-accreditation status and lists the institution or program in an official publication with other similarly accredited or pre-accredited institutions or programs.

5. Monitoring: The accrediting agency monitors each accredited institution or program throughout the period of accreditation granted to verify that it continues to meet the agency's standards.

6. Reevaluation: The accrediting agency periodically reevaluates each institution or program that it lists to ascertain whether continuation of its accredited or pre-accredited status is warranted.

U.S. Department of Education: http://www2.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/index.html

Steps in the Accreditation Process

• Over the next 20 years, North America will continue to have a demand for increasing the output and quality of its education and workforce preparation systems

• Canada, as well as other western nations, face a future of slow population growth, and fewer young entry level workers, resulting in a smaller percentage of its population available for its workforce

• This means more employment and career options for its participants• Workforce will also be expected to meet the skill demands of a

rapidly growing global economy• The economy continues to define what basic, academic, and

technical education preparation will be needed in the future

Jones, R. T. (2013). The New American Workforce: Challenges and Opportunities for Higher Education. Education Workforce Policy, LLC. http://www.educationworkforcepolicy.com/papers.html

The New Workforce

• Every worker (unskilled to PhD) is subject to increasingly uncontrollable changes in their work environment

• Employers are requiring higher basic, academic, and technical skills, measured competencies, adaptive learning, critical thinking, teamwork, etc.

• Recent studies suggest:• 78% of employers are very concerned with the fact that over

40% of the workforce is scheduled to retire in the next 5 years• 68% are concerned with loss of skills with the changing

demographics of the entering workforce• 40% say college graduates are not prepared for entry level

work• 60% say college graduates are not prepared for advancementJones, R. T. (2013). The New American Workforce: Challenges and Opportunities for Higher Education. Education Workforce Policy, LLC. http://www.educationworkforcepolicy.com/papers.html

New Workforce (continued)

• At the Federal level, policy trends are reflective of the public’s growing awareness of the changing expectations in the work force

• One of these trends is for more accountability in Higher Education in the areas of :• Outcomes• Curriculum• Graduation rates• Costs• Accreditation• These are all a growing requirement for post-secondary education

Jones, R. T. (2013). The New American Workforce: Challenges and Opportunities for Higher Education. Education Workforce Policy, LLC. http://www.educationworkforcepolicy.com/papers.html

Public Policy and Higher Education

• One of the challenges for higher education is to develop a series of strategic alliances with groups external to the university

• Both employers and educators are looking toward developing partnerships in developing the definition of new skills and competencies, the related curriculum, the required assessments, and the resulting credential

• This system opens up the pipeline for skilled workers and provides a communication system for internships, work based learning, and ultimate support for placement of graduates within the industry

• Forming strategic alliances with professional organizations and accreditors ensures alignment of curricula and outcome standards

Jones, R. T. (2013). The New American Workforce: Challenges and Opportunities for Higher Education. Education Workforce Policy, LLC. http://www.educationworkforcepolicy.com/papers.html

Public Policy and Higher Education (continued)

• 84% Expect students to complete a significant project before graduation that demonstrates their depth of knowledge in their major AND their acquisition of analytical, problem solving and communications skills

• 81% Expect students to complete an internship or community based field project to connect classroom learning with real-world experiences

• 81 % Ensure that students develop the skills to research questions in their field and develop evidence-based analyses

• 73% Expect students to work through ethical issues and debates to form their own judgments about the issues at stake

LEAP: What Employers Want. The Humanities Institute http://humanitiesinstitute.wfu.edu/leap-what-employers-want

Employers Assess the Potential Value of High Impact Educational Practices

• Effective Oral/Written Communication• Critical Thinking/Analytical Reasoning• Knowledge/skills applied to real world settings• Analyze/solve complex problems• Connect choices and actions to ethical decisions• Teamwork skills/Ability to collaborate• Ability to innovate and be creative• Concepts/developments in science/technologyLEAP: What Employers Want. The Humanities Institute http://humanitiesinstitute.wfu.edu/leap-what-employers-wantDunn, L. (2012). 4 Must-Have Traits for Hospital Employees in a Value Based World

Employers’ Top Priorities for Student Learning Outcomes in College

• The concern of employers is that their new employees have a “high” quality” education has resulted in the specialized accrediting organizations (especially true where certification/licensure is required to practice)

• Have interest in accreditation in three areas:• Institutions• Academic Programs• Individual Graduates

Jones, D. (2002). Different Perspectives on Information about Educational Quality: Implications for the Role of Accreditation. CHEA Occasional Paper. Council for Higher Education Accreditation

Employers and Accreditation

Employers tend to focus solely on institutional reputation• Assurance that the institution is a credible source of

new employees with solid cognitive abilities and the right combination of attitudes and values

Jones, D. (2002). Different Perspectives on Information about Educational Quality: Implications for the Role of Accreditation. CHEA Occasional Paper. Council for Higher Education Accreditation

Accreditation / Institutions

Employers tend to focus on three things• Capacity• Overall reputation• Nature of its faculty• Nature of its curriculum• Good practice• Co-ops, Internships, Service Learning• How responsive are faculty to the needs of the employer• Outcomes• # of graduates• Placement information• Pass rates on certification/licensure• Anything that allows comparison between programs

Jones, D. (2002). Different Perspectives on Information about Educational Quality: Implications for the Role of Accreditation. CHEA Occasional Paper. Council for Higher Education Accreditation

Accreditation / Academic Programs

Employers in this area focused exclusively on outcomes:• Knowledge, skill, and abilities• Certification/Licensure• Demonstrated ability to apply knowledge in the

workplace setting

Jones, D. (2002). Different Perspectives on Information about Educational Quality: Implications for the Role of Accreditation. CHEA Occasional Paper. Council for Higher Education Accreditation

Accreditation/ Individual Graduates

• Program Goals• Must regularly assess• Must have minimal expectations in knowledge, skills

and abilities• Adequate Resources• Clerical, finances, classroom, laboratories, computer

resources etc.• Adequate personnel• Faculty and staff• Qualifications and certifications/licensure

CARTE Standards Areas

• Student and Graduate Evaluation/Assessments• Student evaluation• Outcomes Assessment (must meet thresholds as

designated standards)• Retention Rates• Credential Exam pass rate• Graduate Satisfaction• Clinical Supervisor Evaluation of Intern• Clinical Intern Competency Self-assessment• Required Content Areas covered• Required Knowledge and Skill competencies• Requires Support Content Areas• Positive Placement (graduate school or employed

full/part time in a related field or continuing in education or serving the military

CARTE Standards Areas

• Fair Practices• Publications, academic calendars• Lawful and non-discriminatory practices• Safeguards (health and safety)• Student records

CARTE Standards Areas

• Curriculum Content• Foundations of Professional Practice• 23 standards• Individualized Patient/Client Assessment• 15 standards• Planning Treatment/Programs• 10 standards• Implementing Treatment/Programs• 15 standards• Evaluating Treatment Programs• 6 standards• Managing Recreational Therapy Practice• 16 standards

CARTE Standards Areas

• Supportive Coursework• Anatomy, Physiology, Analysis of

Movement/Biomechanics• 6 Standards• Human Growth and Development• 5 Standards• Psychology, Cognitive/Educational, and Abnormal• 13 Standards• Disabling Condition• 4 Standards

CARTE Standards Areas

• Other suggested supportive coursework• Motor Learning• Counseling, Group Dynamics, Leadership• First Aid and Safety• Pharmacology• Health Care Organizations/Legal Aspects of Health Care• Recreation and Leisure

• Clinical Experience• 3 Standards• Use of CARTE’s Clinical Performance Appraisal Summary

Form• Interns use the Competency Self-Assessment Detail Form

CARTE Standards Areas (continued)

• Quality professional preparation in recreational therapy education• Advocacy for quality professional preparation in recreational

therapy education• Focus on competency/outcome driven education• Responsive to the profession• Responsive to changes in the practice environment• Relevant professional standards• Monitor the performance of CARTE accredited recreational therapy

programs• Identification of trends in parallel allied health accreditation

bodies• Diverse committee membership (International representation,

practitioners, students, faculty, administration, consumers of TR service)

The Value of CARTE to Employers and Internship Supervisors

• Integration of practitioner feedback regarding changing practices/service delivery

• Practitioner input into CARTE standards will result in revised / updated standards that address changing RT practice

• Consistent competent new practitioners / co-workers• Practitioners will be confident that Student Intern

applicants from accredited RT programs will have been exposed to a consistent, comprehensive education

• RT Educators will be more in tune with current TR practice

• Future RT students will be confident about their choices / options for a RT Education

The Value of CARTE to the Practitioner

QUESTIONS

Dunn, L. (2012). 4 Must-Have Traits for Hospital Employees in a Value-Based World. Becker’s Hospital Review http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-management-administration/4-must-have-traits-for-hospital-employees-in-a-value-based-world.html

Jones, D. (2002). Different Perspectives on Information about Educational Quality: Implications for the Role of Accreditation. CHEA Occasional Paper. Council for Higher Education Accreditation.

Jones, R. T. (2013). The New American Workforce: Challenges and Opportunities for Higher Education. Education Workforce Policy, LLC. http://www.educationworkforcepolicy.com/papers.html

LEAP: What Employers Want. The Humanities Institute http://humanitiesinstitute.wfu.edu/leap-what-employers-want

Standards and Guidelines for the Accreditation of Educational Programs in Recreational Therapy. CAAHEP

The Value of Accreditation (June, 2010). Council for Higher Education Accreditation

U.S. Department of Education. http://www2.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/index.html

REFERENCES