2 year degree courses

Hi there, I am a physio who has qualified through the two year course - MSc. Rehab Science run at Glasgow Caledonia University.

My question is: what is the objective of this poll and what are the measures by which you are going to assess the relative merits of the courses that you are talking about?

There has been much talk about this in the UK and at times the nature of the discussion has not reflected well on the profession as a whole. The discussion seems to polarise around who's better than who.
In any degree course there are requirements that must met before you are accepted and there is no easy way on to the course which I undertook.

Surely the real concern of the profession as a whole is the competency of all graduates whether they do a conventional undergrad course or a post grad 2 year course? Asking such a simple question will inevitably lead to a "simple" outcome that has no scientific validity and potentially this may influence the opinions of many physiotherapists whith whom these people have to work with on a daily basis.

Hi there!
I got the feeling that the 2 yr degree courses were with regard to undergrad degrees not the post grad one's.I think post grad 2 yr degrees are equally good as by then 1already has a foundation in the field.however if it the kind of crash course degrees wherein any science grad can learn PT as a post grad degree then in a way I do feel we are undermining our course. We are among the few healthcare professions that offer to teach our profession to any one so interested in a neat 2 yr package.Will MBBS or dentistry be taught that way??

The way Sydney Uni apparently runs it's Masters of Physio programme (2 years full time), you have to have done a relevant degree first. I think preference is given to those who have completed the sports science degree at the same institution. I am happy to be corrected if this information is inaccurate!

Having said that, I don't think the nuances of physiotherapy can be taught in either 2 or 4 years.

It took me ages to become a competent physio. I had great hands - I could feel absolutely everything that was being taught to me. But it took me 3 years to get enough patients "under the hands" to develop my "feel".

My point is - whether you learn physio in 2 years or 4, it is what you do to learn after you graduate that matters.

I still haven't come across a great 1st year physio - have you? I have come across some who have great potential but never someone who I could consider an equal or even an equal of a 2nd or 3rd year graduate.

The mandatory continuing ed in the APA (Australia) is a bit of a joke. 100 points over three years. 1 point per hour. You can do your 100 points in courses, reading journals, or even having a chat about physio over coffee (or I suspect even this website). At present, I blow that away in less than a year. I think every physio should be able to do 100 points in a year. And get this - if you don't meet their standards (100 points), the form of punishment is *encouragement*. They don't penalise you in any way!!!

I haven't come up with a good way to ensure quality physios. There are too many that accept mediocrity and not step up to the challenge of learning more.

I would like to see people having to do a Masters after 3-5 years post-grad to ensure quality. Such numbers would be logistically difficult but economies of scale might make it worthwhile.

But would that just improve people's knowlege rather than making them good physios? I don't know...

Having studied a science degree, then a full 4 year physio degree afterwards I still felt I needed several years to become confident in my practice. However it is a simple measure of what needs to be taught to acquire a comprehensive base. In my opinion, and this is my opinion, 2 years is simply not enough.

Short courses are devaluing the profession when at the same time we are pushing for longer courses to satisfy the requirements of a "Dr" title. Soon nurses will be doing modules part-time to become physiotherapists! And as for recognition internationally, well a 2 year course simply won't stand up.

I do applaud anyone of course who has taken the initiative to do a 2 years course and I welcome them to our profession. However it is unlikely that I would ever employ them.

hi
I do strongly feel that we need to promote our profession and bring it up to the "Dr' level and having said that I donot think that an individual who graduated in 2yrs will do anything to promote our stance.
One needs a strong 4yr base in the field before even contemplating a PG and this may be done in 2yrs but the learning and practise still doesnt end there does it?
I have also come to hear of bachelors in physiotherapy being offered as correspondence degrees!!
Is there no end to this?Is there some way we can maintain an even standard worldwide?
regards

In my view physiotherapy education requires a major shake up. How did the csp allow 2 years 'masters' courses to start in the first place? I completed a four year bachelors degree; does this mean that a two year masters graduate is more qualified than I am? What are the general public expected to think when choosing a physio - more informed people may perceive that a 'masters' physio would be better trained and more clinically proficient than a mere bachelors physio. In my opinion thats what having a masters qualification should mean.

My experience of candidates from these new programmes is that everything is crammed into two years instead of three or four. The result is we have new 'masters' physios entering the job market with a more narrow knowledge and skills base than bachelor physios qualifying at the same time! I am involved in mentoring physios on a daily basis so I feel that I am qualified to comment on this.

In my opinion physiotherapy masters programmes and qualifications should only be open to bachelors qualified physiotherapists with several years of experience under their belts. Anything else merely devalues the MSc title and devalues our professsion. Can you ever imagine medical schools opening up two or three year degree programmes for graduates with no medical training or experience and at the end of the programme giving them a qualification that is ranked higher than graduates from a five or six year programme? I think not! Furthermore would you be happy having treatment from a doctor thus qualified?

Two year physio masters programmes should never have been allowed in the first instance and I supect they have been brought in to provide physio training "on the cheap". Physio schools have an obligation to turn out clinically proficient physios capable of working independently. Of course our learning doesent stop on qualification but minimum standards have to be set and maintained. Our universities and the CSP have manifestly failed to do so.

My solution to the above is to make all my patients aware of the disparity in training and the now meaningless terms BSc Physiotherapy and MSc Physiotherapy. Having said all the above the greatest leveller here is clinical proficiency - patients will migrate to physios who help them the most. In my experience patients are generally not to concerned or informed about the level of training I have undertaken- they only care about wether they are getting better or not!

Well said 8o

I agree. I like the bit about devaluing the "Masters" title.

apparently in Canada
students who are doing a 2 year Masters are better than those who did a 4 year bachelor degree!!!

its so unreal! makes you cry

and as ALOPHYSIO said, you need experience to learn, preferably working with other physios....


i grad 1 yr ago, and feel i need to learn much much more.....

Not really wanting to be devil's advocate here as I share your concerns to some extent. However I think the graduate entry approach, whether a Masters degree or clinical doctorate, is more complex than just the number of years. So I think it depends:

* If it is necessary for students undertake a biomedical bachelors degree or exercise science degree or something of that ilk - so not just any undergraduate training but something that lays foundation for the physio degree then this can be a good thing. Where universities are doing this it means that the students enter at an advanced level and the course can be tailored around clinical science and practice

* Students generally are entering the course and subsequently their profession with more emotional maturity and with advanced learning skills and this is a good thing for physiotherap. My experience of teaching undergraduate students taking on their first degree vs students who have already done another bachelors degree is that the latter outshine their less mature colleagues, are more motivated, have better communication and empathy with their patients and with other team members, and generally adapt to the social norms of being a clinician much more readily.

* Students who do a four year undergraduate bachelors degree are currently being swindled. In most cases they should at least be getting an honours degree, especially if they had to undertake research on their course. Most bachelors degrees in other fields are only three years. So they should be getting recognised for what they do

* Students are expected to learn at an advanced and accelerated rate on these courses. Many of them have reduced holiday breaks and longer days. so on the whole they are more intensive and pressured.

And by the way I do have huge reservations about the implementation of graduate entry level degrees. It may be dumbing down the professsion - who is going to want to go back and undertake a proper research degree or advanced course work after already completing 6-7 years? And what about the financial expectations of graduates who leave university after 6-7 years? There is going to be some very disappointed physios when they find out what is usually being offered.

So I am in two minds about it and I really think it depends on how it is implemented.

Here we go again, this topic has been done to death but i'll express my views on it (based on my experiences).

Before I start, i did an undergrad in sports science (4 years) and then the masters in physio (2 years).

I can completely understand people saying 2 years isn't long enough as theres so much to learn, and this I think would be true if it was two normal uni years. An undergrad has 4 years generally running late Sept or early October-May. Thats 3 or 4 months off in between each year. A postgrad has 1 month off each year if theyre lucky as when the undergrads are on holiday they're on clinical placements. So the actual time an undergrad is at uni in those four years is actually only 3 years really. Suddenly we've lost half the deficit. I genuinely believe that you can learn and retain just as much in 2 intensive years (where you're immersed in all things physio) than you can with 3 years split with months off spreading it over 4 years. Add into the mix the general observation (as pointed out below) that masters students are generally more motivated than undergrads because they probably pay to be there - its what they want to do. Im not sure about you but for a large part of the start of my undergrad I was quite immature and enjoyed the student lifestyle a bit more than I do now, so extra reading was rare.

When i've done placements i've done well (and so has the majority). To me thats all I really cared about - how qualified physios would see me when comparing me with other students and where they expect me to be at. Both degrees are a means to an end and as rightly pointed out below, its not the degree that makes you a good physio, its what you do after. To write off the 2 year course without actually knowing how hard we work for 2 full years is completely narrow minded, and if (from my experience) the supervisors who watch us work are happy then you'll forgive me for thinking theres a bit of jealousy at the fact we didnt spend 4 years doing what can be done in 2 if you actually put your mind to it and commit. What i mean by that is that you can learn the basics at uni, build on it on placement (which by the way is the exact same amount of hours for MSc and BSc) to a point where you can go out and work as a competent professional. Uni doesn't teach you to be a good physio, it teaches you the basics and these don't have to take four years to learn. I dont want to spend any more time at uni than I have to as i'd rather get out and learn clinically.

I have found great information through this post.Thanks everybody for sharing great information...