A few years ago I conducted a peer-reviewed research project that created quite a stir at the national level. In fact, my research resulted in two published correspondences from an accreditation agency, the same agency whom I was volunteering for as an on-site visitor. Click here to read the published letters as well as my published response: Journal of Allied Health response 2.PDF and: Journal of Allied Health response 1.PDF
Fast forward to 2012. In a recent cover story titled: We Heard You, published in the Winter 2012 CAATE Newsletter, the author outlines several transformations taking place within the athletic training accreditation agency.
The Newsletter article reports several findings from independent focus groups and strategic planning activities that include: 1) reduced variation in site-visits, 2) more training for site visitors, and 3) on-line processes to lessen the burden. Click here to read the full article: CAATE Winter 2012 Newsletter.PDF
What is ironic, the new CAATE transformations described in the Newsletter article are not all that new; but some of the same recommendations I had outlined several years earlier in my peer-reviewed article. Click to read Journal of Allied Health.PDF
In fact, these new transformations described in the Newsletter are not the first time my recommendations had been put forth as something new. For example, in my peer-reviewed article I wrote: “Perhaps a knowledge test of the current standards should be given to all site visitors. (See discussion section, second paragraph, p. 71). In the year following my publication, JRC-AT designed and implemented an exam procedure to improve reliability. Click to read: JRC-AT cover letter for Site Visitor Exam.PDF.
According to Tiffany Louise Green, a master’s degree student at Eastern Illinois University: “Ten years have gone by since the Wimer 2005 study and [my] present study with minimal changes to CAATE site visitor training and performance.”
Ms. Green’s thesis research and results are fascinating for several reasons. First, her study was conducted independently from mine. Second, her results validated my findings. The title of her thesis was: Perceptions of the 2011-2012 CAATE site visitors for athletic training educational programs in Illinois. Click to open and read the full paper: AT Accreditation Masters Degree Thesis.PDF Thirdly, Ms. Green cited my study not only as a supporting citation, but also as one of the key reasons for her own research, using my name (i.e., Wimer) in the abstract itself. It is somewhat unique for another author’s name to appear in an abstract.
In an unrelated citation, Dr. Jason Craddock cited my research as part of his doctoral dissertation in 2009 when he wrote: “In a study by Wimer (2005), interrater reliability was reviewed between athletic training accreditation site visitors. Athletic Training accreditation site visitors are ATCs who review ATEPs for compliance to accreditation standards. Accreditation site visitors were to review hypothetical scenarios and determine compliance or noncompliance based on accreditation standards. The author analyzed the results for interrater reliability among between several subgroups. In analyzing the results, the author stated that there was not a difference in the ratings between site visitors who held a master’s or doctoral degree. This author suggested that the demographic factor of degree did not influence that rating ability of the participants.” Interrater reliability of Psychomoter Skills.PDF
For clarification purposes, CAATE is an acronym. It is used to identify the Commission on Accreditation of Athletic Training Education. Formally, this group was known as the Joint Review Committee on Athletic Training (JRC-AT) until it changed it’s name on July 1, 2006. The people who make-up the agency work very hard to make sure that a college or university has met a prescribed set of standards for quality. To earn accreditation, a program director must prepare a lengthy self-study and arrange for other Certified Athletic Trainers (ATC) and/or Physicians who have been trained in the procedures of accreditation to visit their campus in order to validate that the standards are being met.
Today, several Athletic Training Education Program Directors and Educators from across the country have specifically acknowledged that my proposals (once so vehemently opposed) have been folded into the conversation at the national level and are beginning to represent a best-practice approach.
For instance, one Program Director writes “Dr. Wimer’s scholarly efforts have impacted the athletic training profession in a substantive and positive way. In particular his contribution to the improvements in the accreditation processes will be of lasting benefit.”
He goes on to say; “in 2005 Jeff published a study in the Journal of Allied Health that was rather controversial at that time and engendered a healthy exchange of letters to the editor between Dr. Wimer and at that time the JRC-AT (now CAATE). In reviewing this work when it was published and following the process of site visitor professional development, it is clear that Dr. Wimer’s study has had a continuing impact on the improvement of the site visit process for athletic training accreditation. It is interesting to note that subsequent to the article’s publication, CAATE has planned and implemented various quality improvement initiatives leading to better quality site visits and visitors. Some of these initiatives rise directly from Jeff’s paper.”
Another Program Director writes; “Of particular note is Dr. Wimer’s 2005 Journal of Allied Health article on Interrater Reliability among Athletic Training Accreditation Site Visitors. As I recall, the leadership of the accrediting agency were dismissive of the article at the time. It is interesting to note that in the last two years they have since crafted a pretty rigorous redesign of the site visitor preparation process consistent with many of the concerns raised in the article.”
Still another Athletic Training Educator and Clinical Educator Coordinator writes; “Dr. Wimer’s interests in gender, service, and athletic training education have led to many publications and presentations. His 2005 publication in the Journal of Allied Health entitled “An investigation of interrater reliability among athletic training accreditation site visitors” is particularly of note. During the time of this publication, athletic training education was undergoing significant change, and there was distrust in and a lack of understanding of the accreditation process. The site visit procedure for accreditation was particularly under scrutiny. Dr. Wimer conducted a study that investigated the interrater reliability of athletic training site visitors during the site visit process. The study was approved by the Joint Review Committee for Athletic Training (JRC-AT), which provided recommendations for athletic training education program accreditation to our accrediting body. His results were shocking; in essence, there was no reliability among athletic training site visitors. In his publication, he identified several solutions that the JRC-AT could implement to improve the overall site visit process, such as taking a knowledge examination of the standards, providing continuing education exclusively for site visitors, and providing consistent training programs both online and face to face for site visitors. …. I would like to believe that CAATE reviewed Dr. Wimer’s suggestions and finally saw the need to implement them.”
As the saying goes, sometimes its Better to be Late than Never when it comes to making a difference. More importantly, I am pleased to know that my work has, and continues to make a positive contribution in transitioning a profession towards quality improvement.
