3 or 4 years for UG degree?

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

I note a link currently at the top of the Podiatry Arena website to the new University of Newcastle website for the ?only 3 year program in Australia. So I have just taken a look...

Surprisingly, rather than trying to play down the fact it is a 3 year program, the course organisers are highlighting and promoting this as a fast-track option to registration as a podiatrist in Australia.

Whilst I acknowledge the growth and evolution of UG degrees, surely some consistency in the length of a UG degree is needed across Australia? It would be a different story if the program was a graduate Masters or similar.

Curious for opinions from our wise academics and others...

LL

 

UniSA is still a 3 year degree, but their total contact hours are very close to that of the 4 year courses given many of the clinical hours happen out of semester.

Be interesting to see what Newcastle leaves out of thie course to have it fit into 3 years.

 

Stephen

I believe UniSA is to be a 4 year program as of next year...that was the most recent info I heard.

LL

 

Netizens

The vast majority of four year podiatry programs (in the Commonwealth, including UK) are made up of either a year science foundation plus a traditonal three year podiatry program; or a three year podiatry program with a year internship.

The three year program is more or less standard across the board (give or take some regional differences) The pattern has not changed from Diploms days in content and competence training. Not intended as a criticism , just a fact.

Programs dilivery may vary with many emphasising intellectualisation, promoting analysis and synthesis The lobby for 1000 hours (traditonal three year syllabus) practice at univeristy level would suggest the confidence in training has not been lost by lobbists but this will become more difficult to argue in the current financial situation.

I believe a three year course for registration followed by an earn and learn option to Honours, would be far more satisfactory for most students and parents. This would offset costs and reduce long standing debt.

Better acceptance of life long learning is required before graduate podiatrists can progress into specialties. Curently the surgical podiatrist pathway is one of the few options available in most countries.

Graduate entry programs at best consist of accelerated academic experiences grounded in practice; and at worste are four year syllabi taught in two years. These raise fundemental questions in academe about academic creep but they are also a superbe source of revenue to universities.

Graduate entry programs are a two edged sword and I fully agree with Felicity's comments (made on another theme). However more confirdence in accelerated learning will result in undergaduate programs geting shorter.


Cameron
Hey. what do I know?

 

I too am curious to see how Newcastle will shove the whole curriculum into 3 years. Currently at LTU we expect our students to complete half a semester extra in the 4 year course in their holiday times in the form of clinical placement and practice. So, in effect we have a four and a quarter year course. Inside those years we are cutting every possible corner to include the vast amount of new information required. I think we can all agree that the overall knowledge and practice base of Podiatry has increased exponentially over the years.

One of our current issues is that of teaching biomechanics and orthotic therapy. With the amorphous state of understanding of the pathomechanical theory underpinning this subject area, we are trying to ensure our stuents become critical analysts of new research and practice, and yet can still grasp all the fundamentals of the game. Shoving that in - among all the medicine, paeds, gerontology, anatomy, radiography, physical therpay, psychology, health promotion...yada, yada, you know where I am going.

Another interesting aspect of our crowded curriculum is that of pharmacology and prescribing rights. We have a staggering amount of microbiology and pharmacology in the course; and even this may not be sufficient to entitle our graduates to prescribe once the legislation is fully enacted. How will Newcastle cope with this?

Having had a considerable input into the initial planning of the UWS and CSU 4 year courses, I would be a very anxious citizen if my job was to write and implement this new curriculum. Having said that, I think I would also be delighted to learn some lessons from its success - we could use the hints!

I noticed that the course has not yet been approved by the NSW Rego Board (according to the website - things might have changed). Does anyone anticipate any problems with registering a shorter course, or even in the job market - will the qualification be seen in any way as a 'lesser' degree? I hope not - for the sake of all those people who are working so hard to make this course happen.

 

Felicity

Destuffing the curriculum - my favourite topic!

Apart from separating the need to know from the nice to know a spiral curricculum that links horizontally as well as vertically is critical.

As currivulum builders this is something we know only too well.

In the depths of theory there are two basic models of curriculum the product model and the process model. The latter looks at the end product and cares less about how they got there. Provided they meet the criteria for graduation then this is appropriate. This can be competence based and suits a training rather than education.

The process model is an entirely different animal and relates to developing an enquiring mind with outcomes which will accumulate to cognitive skills and problem solving strategies grounded within the culture and practice of podiatry, that allow the graduate to earn a living as a base grade practitioner.

Local geography and history will determine differences in emphasis, such as, in NZ pod students graduate with competence registration to take and interpret medical images. But again we know the scope of practice between the Commonwealth is more or less the same.

There are many curricular models to follow with problem solving the most commonly cited. The easiest way to change a curriculum is to change the assessment andagain there is chapter and verse in the medical literature where this has happened. The biggest challenge to changing program delivery comes from staff entrenshment. Unwilling to accept the need to reformat their program the approach soon slips back into "the same old same old."

Changing vocational degrees needs the sanction of professional bodies and registration boards. This can bring its own challenges to curriculum builders because professional protectionism prevents breaking the old models of training.

Now there are several things which help in this journey including a clear ten year focus on podiatry. Curriculum models take five years to evolve and a ten year span gives workable deadlines to achieve optimal change. I am only aware of one country that undertook a needs analysis,then proceded to develop a program to meet these skills.


Must off to a meet

Cameron

 

Cameron

Sage words...

I wonder though at your thoughts on comparisons with Commonwealth and US podiatry education.

Although I acknowlege they are different beasts entirely, as a coal-face clinician I cant help but admire the depth of vocational training that DPMs obtain relative to Commonwealth UG degrees. Considering the time-frame for the educational process is similar, I wonder why if a similar end-point of expertise was expected from Australian podiatry degrees, why it wouldnt give podiatry boards and professional organisations more power to break through the medical monopoly in this country. They could argue comparable educational standards in pharmacology, diagnotic pathology and radiology to the powers that be etc.

Also, what are your thoughts of the newer graduate medical degrees in Australia that produce medico's who have never had to sit through traditional anatomy, histology and biochemistry syllabus? Does that type of paradigm have a place in Australian podiatry education - no 'formal' units of study, just vertical and integrated problem-based curriculum.

In your own words, 'what say you'?

LL

 

Here's an interesting thing - there are no really good (or even mediocre) studies on the costs of 'different' curriculum paradigms, in particular the Problem Based Learning approach. It is a fabulous model, but the anecdotal evidence points to it being more more resource intensive/expensive to run.

One of the biggest problems I see is in academics themselves. It is a ****ty job in terms of pay, perks, holidays etc (yes - just in case you all were wondering, we get 4 weeks per annum, not 26 weeks!). The people who are often attracted to the lifestyle are good researchers, because that is the only way to crawl up the payscale (forget a promotion without a PhD and a publication list as long as a roll of loo paper). But researchers are often not terribly focussed on pedagogical issues (ie they have their hands full with research, getting them to embrace the whole educational thing, as it is BIG, is a tough ask). If you are a Podiatry Academic you need to be:

a great professional
a fabulous clinician
a wondrous role model
a good counsellor
a top flight researcher
a brilliant teacher
a gun administrator

and not mind driving around in a 1984 Corolla. Personally, I love it, but it is a vocation (poverty, chastity, humility....).

Getting change in any environment is tough. Getting change in an entrenched environment, where any idea has to pass through a myriad of subcommittees, and then will be appallngly resourced, and then be forced to adapt to whatever new fangled notion this week's Vice Chancellor has, well stuff it!

And then there is the profession - why can't students make pads, debride, know PJ Read's pharmacopoea by heart..... like we did when we graduated? There is a strong flavour of skills mastery based learning still floating in the professional air.

When planning the now defunct UWS curriculum - the team did indeed use a spiral approach, and lots of nicely embedded and contextualised process stuff. I think it lasted just long enough for the ink to dry on the document and then the 'safe' approach was adopted.

If Newcastle can pull this off, then they deserve our total respect and admiration. I hope the University is funding and supporting them to create an innovative curriculum, and not just expecting the usual round of miracles.

 

LL and Feleicity

>I wonder though at your thoughts on comparisons with Commonwealth and US podiatry education.

I know a little about the Commonwealth because I have worked in the system in UK , NZ and Australia and had an opportunity to visit Toronto four years ago. I have had no direct experience of the US other than working with DPMs in various places. So I am not able to make an informed comparison. I have been interested in researching the history of global podiatry and can say that podiatry education in the US remained prodominently within private educational institutes outwith public sector universities until very recently. More are making the transition but not all centres. Doctorates bestowed on graduates were professional qualifications (not PhDs) and in equivalence terms relate academically to undergraduate honours degrees, elsewhere. To attract students to private centres of podiatric education has involved attractive syllabi but according to comments made on a 60 minute program, students need not complete all components and leave to practice in some states where full training is a not a prerequisite. This was a major concern to the professional association espeicially where malpractice was involved. Now that may have changed but I can only assume one frustration in the US has been a lack of national competence standards. Although I stand to be corrected.

>Does that type of paradigm have a place in Australian podiatry education - no 'formal' units of study, just vertical and integrated problem-based curriculum.

I spent a year at the Centre for Medical Education at Dundee University reading clinical education about the time that problem solving curriculum was being developed for medical courses. The Centre is where Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE) were originally developed. While I was there I rubbed shoulders with many of the the researchers who would go to influence medical curriculum, including Australia. David Newble was from Queensland and wrote a brilliant book on competences for doctors. The other buzz area at the time was concept mapping Simply put this was looking at the theoretic constructs which made up high level behaviours such decision making or clinical judgement. In theory once a concept map has been developed for the elements that make up core curriculum then this pathway of learning can be out together linking horizontally (same academic level) and virtically through the levels from novice to expert. "Problem Solving" can mean many things to many people bit whatever takes place relies on student motivation to do the enabling material to move through the taught components. The self directed learning materials are packaged and available , so the student is not left without stimulus, but this is not teacher led. This would be no different in podiatry courses where attendance at a lecture has a pre and post reading requirement. Increased reliance on student centred segments with less teachered centred delivery is the basis for shortened courses. So back to the medics who do not do formal dissection as part of their taught program. They will follow student centred electives and manage this within their free time. In the past this might have been referred to as "hidden curriculum."


>It is a fabulous model, but the anecdotal evidence points to it being more more resource intensive/expensive to run.

Certainment.

>It is a ****ty job in terms of pay, perks, holidays etc

Univeristies now put priority on research, consultancy , personal development and oh yes, teaching. That is what research assistants are for, they need to cut their teeth on something. After all the best way to learn is to teach. Sound familiar?

> Getting change in an entrenched environment, where any idea has to pass through a myriad of subcommittees, and then will be appallngly resourced, and then be forced to adapt to whatever new fangled notion this week's Vice Chancellor has, well stuff it!

Absolutely. The very sad thing about podiatry education is the complete absence of a formal platform where sharing experiences can be routinely done. The UK had for many years a teachers association which had its own journal and annual conference. Over a decade this grow to include international delegates and proved to be a worthwhile talk fest which influenced the development of core curriculum. Once the responsibility for common curriculum fell from the Society to individual centres for podiatry education (universities), that colegiate association became redundent. I understand this has now been reserected (thank goodness) and I was delighted to learn there will be a segment at the next FIP coneference designated specifically to podiatric education.

In Australaia and NZ there have been some attempts to bring educators/researchers together at conferences but distance and biannual events make this a token jesture. Also in the past these have taken the form of Heads of Departments meetings which, God love them, is a format garenteed not promote free debate. I am speaking as an ex Head of Department.

>And then there is the profession - why can't students make pads, debride, know PJ Read's pharmacopoea by heart..... like we did when we graduated? There is a strong flavour of skills mastery based learning still floating in the professional air.

Yes tis true. Training a workforce would be cheaper and moving down a peg to TAFE (technical college) would make podiatry a flag ship. This would dove tail perfectly with foot care assistant training and foot and hand technicians offering a superb career ladder. Podiatry would follow a national curriculum (set by the traditionalists and 1000 hours apprentiship) Money galore would be thrown at podiatry because of the high employment opportunity. No need to export your unemployed to WA, train them to become foot health professionals at your local TAFE.

I have always prefered a dual qualification with a degree in podology and a clinical training to practice. That way you can meet all expectation. However I would be delighted (as would the university) if the profession bore the cost of professional examinitions. Students could present themself for attestation and the professional body would employ examiners and inspectors. They may subcontact the work to the universities but licence to practice would be a professional qulaification.

>When planning the now defunct UWS curriculum - the team did indeed use a spiral approach, and lots of nicely embedded and contextualised process stuff. I think it lasted just long enough for the ink to dry on the document and then the 'safe' approach was adopted.

I did see the original and the revised programs too when I was comparing universities curriculum in 2002 so I appreciate what you are saying . However there are problems in commisioned curriculum, especially when the teaching team do not, or have no opportunity to take complete ownership of it. Unless this is driven throughout there is a natural tendency to liberally interpret the outlines. A good indication that things are not quite working out is where there is a rewrite before the end of the five years. Curriculum models are measured in five years.

My impression at the time I met the staff at the university was there was very high expectation but little resources with which to realise these excellent goals. That is no reflection of the wonderful staff and graduates but as a curriculum builder the long term sustainability of the unit was clearly in jepordy because of these deficits.

>If Newcastle can pull this off, then they deserve our total respect and admiration. I hope the University is funding and supporting them to create an innovative curriculum, and not just expecting the usual round of miracles.

When I started in this business I had long hair was youthful and had boundless energies, a life time of working in education I have no hair, completely knackered, been kicked from pillar to post, crapped on, bad mouthed and dumped from mainstream education. I have had the displeasure to work for some of the most inefficient, arrogant assholes, cheapskates and viscious bastards you can ever image. But I still have enough energy to keep the Bastards honest! (Reference to a famous political slogan in Australia).

Please note, none of the above relate to any podiatry colleagues I have worked for and with -all have given me the greatest pleasure to share the floor with them.

I share your best wishes to all involved in currulum buiding.

Cameron is available for private consultancy at extremely high retainers.

Law and Order is on

Cameron

 

Newcastle Student

Yo! Remember me? I applied 132 times to get into dental hygiene, and last year finnal got in to Newcastle DH course, just about the time I had discovered podiatry as a possibility. Now I am one year to go on DH, and won't pass, can't do SPSS, but I have all the human bioscience and should be able to get into Podiatry next year (last year, I got into all the pod courses in Oz, and stupid fool I am, settled for the DH course) and complete it in 2 years.
OK, it will be in Ourimbah. This campus, halfway between Sydney and Newcastle, is shared with TAFE and the Central Coast Community college.
The DH course is very hands on, skills based, and unbelieviablely, treats dental nurses on a par with wannabe dentists (kids with no intention of being hygienists, who are using the course to get into post graduate dentistry). This attitude bodes well for Podiatry. Rumour has it the pod students will use the dental clinic. (over the dead bodies of the dental professors) I shall be very interested to see how it works out. Newcastle has a good attitude, but I suspect some students will take pod in order to get into post grad medicine.
Carole

 

Does anyone know of a post graduate course in Podiatry? ... apart from Surgery
I thought Adelaide had one but couldn't find it on their website?
Thought this may be a good place to start.
Regards
Mark.

 

If you are looking for a graduate entry model into Podiatry, there isn't one as yet. But, hold on to your hat (for about 5 years or so). The Graduate Entry Masters is high on the desirable list for the current Government/University system, and it is only a matter of time before one state or another implements it.

Meanwhile, the standard undergraduate programs offer a reasonable number of 'credits' within the program to those folk who enter with pre-existing qualifications that match up with the podiatry curriculum.

 

Mark

The University of South Australia has a Master of Health Science (Podiatry), being run by Dr Sara Jones. As far as I know it is the only Master's level program in podiatry being offered in Australia at the moment.

Interestingly, I understand there is a Australian Heads of Podiatry Schools meeting today in Melbourne...hopefully there can be some good debate there on lifting standards and working on producing graduates with increased scope (based on State laws).

LL

 

Felicity Wrote

The NSW Pod Reg Board currently approves

so if they are consistent, I wouldn't see a problem here. Other states will make up their own minds, but if a pod is registered in one state or NZ, they can apply for mutual recognition, which does not require the re-examination of qualifications. This may all change though with National Course accreditation

 

I cant see the B.App. Sci (Podiatry) UWS here....
4 years for nothing!! .... and I've been telling people "Trust me, I'm a Podiatrist"
Mark.

 

Mark,

They have 2 lists on their website!!

 

Phew!!!
For a while there I thought I might be in strife.
Thanks for your thorough search of courses.
Mark.

 

It is clear with all the Diplomas and rare Bachelors why the profession is slow to change-self preservation. How are we going to motivate Podiatrists who shot low to shoot high?

Perhaps clinical systems linking closest to theories emphasis. I think I'll post pone my grandoise surgery ideas for yet another decade or 10. I hoped when kids grow up I'll reconsider. That UNIFORMITY of educational standard is going to be a BATTLE!

 

Podiatry 777 et al

A few years back Curtin University Pod Dept did a national survey of pods relating to post graduate courses. Overall the vast majority of respondents said they did not want to do surgery, diabetic studies, or biomechanics. Surgery was not within their five year plan , diabetes as a subject was dealt with adequately in their undergraduate programs, and bioemchanics was boring.

Respondents were perfectly happy with their current skill range as practitioners but wanted to be assured they had a handle on new developments (including EBP) which would make them be able to continue to serve in the full knowledge they were at the state of art, practitioners. To that effect they wanted post basic education to facilitate this goal.

The main barrier to continuing education was distance, accessability and flexibility of course delivery with most of the higher degree programs favouring males and females. In a previous study of pods in the West ( there was a very high return to post basic education) subjects expressed disappointment that their academic endevours which did not equate to greater earning potential and continuing professional development was not recognised at an academic level. Overall practitioners valued "craft over thought."

The opportunity today to upskill is much better than a decade ago (thank goodness) but until 'specialisation' is recognised by Registration Boards and appropriate qualification a pre-requisite to practice then we remain in the doldrums, I fear.

What say you?

Cameron

 

Cameron,

The study findings reflect students attracted to Podiatry. On one hand you need to build a certain profession profile to capture matching type students. On the on the other hand, the general desire to maintain knowledge, is like a voice saying- if you make me do it-appropriate post grad, I'll do it or I'm out of the job. So I think we can motivate the profession towards change. But all the theoretical discussions with no link to clical application seggregates the natural intellectuals from those more practically gifted. I assume not many out there in the profession currently rate themselves gifted in both areas.

In short, those researches 'intellectuals' may need to lianse more with what the clinicians want to understand.

I found biomechanics theory subject very dry and in UNI could't see a link to prac. They must become linked and explained with clear adequate examples-ie improved teaching method. With time I see links and now enjoy applying my biomechanical knowledge to my practice. Took a long time though, and I fear the students are perplexed by biomechanics to this day. Big task-but needful, or corns and calluses primarily will prevail. I do plenty as needed, but variety can be the spice of life.

 

Accept for surgical podiatry I see no need for specialising-unless your practice clientelle just take you there anyway.

All the Podiatry areas need to be well taught. Why is the ultrasound modality not used on the myriad ankle sprains each year by Podiatry? Perhaps we have not shifted our Professional profile enouph to have them stumbling into our clinics.

I think it has to start with education and reeducation, so safe desirable modalities can be employed easily to treat l.limb ailments.

Regards

Pod777

 

Netizens

Ankles are very interesting, well a crurofile like me would say that anyway, but in some legal definitions of podiatry (treatment of the foot), the foot is inferior to the malleoli and treatment of an ankle condition does not form part of defined podiatry. To do so could land practitoners in very hot water as they would be well outwith their legal scope of practice. I am sure that relates to the Treaty of Rome definition, and defines podiatry, chiropody and podologues in Europe, but I stand to be corrected.

In some State Acts (in Australia), the wording inflects podiatrists may become involved anatomically above the foot only where the action will improve foot morbidity. Historically this refers to biomechanical assessment of the upper body and lower limb but could now be technically applied to acupressure and acupuncture etc.

Treating ankle strains could be a no go area for some podiatrists

What say you?

Cameron

 

Everyone I know would be happy to cut at least half a semester out of the 4 year degree I'm in the middle of.
Two useless subjects:
1. Psychology - yes I now know a little about Freud, but can't help remembering overhearing two of my 1st year companions walking out of an abnormal psychology lecture saying "that's why we have to do this subject, so we know if they're faking it" referring to Munchausen's. Learnt nothing about communication or psychosocial aspects of healthcare with any bearing on a clinical situation.
2. Chemistry - we did an applied biochem subject which covered all the relevant stuff in straight chemistry. I knew someone doing chemistry last year, and looking at the subject matter haven't used it since, don't understand it, and didn't need to understand it for pharmacology. Biochem was enough.

Just my $0.02

 

I went through UniSA when the course was only three years just missing the cut off for when it changed to a four year cousre. It changed because 1) other than the engineers we had the most contact hours and 2) because it wanted to be in line with the other uni's. I had no problems with the contact hours (fitting four years of work into three years) because i was living at home and could rely on good old mum to feed me so didn't need to work much. But i suppose others would be in a different situation and stuggle...