Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Everything that you are ever going to want to know about running shoes: Running Shoes Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Have you considered the Critical Thinking and Skeptical Boot Camp, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

Student biomechanics question

Discussion in 'Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses' started by Hallux29, Jul 9, 2012.

  1. Hallux29

    Hallux29 Welcome New Poster

    Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
    Hello there! I'm a 3rd Year Pod Med student. My apologies if this post is inappropriate, I know this forum isn't designed to aid students with their homework, but I thought I'd give it a try anyway.

    I was reviewing the biomechanics of the foot, and I came across the statement "When the STJ is maximally supinated, the forefoot is inverted relative to the rearfoot. When the STJ is maximally pronated, the forefoot is everted relative to the rearfoot".

    The second half of the statement confuses me - isn't the STJ maximally pronated at the end of contact phase? And at the end of CP, the longitudinal axis of the MTJ is supinated, therefore inverted.

    Could someone explain this to me?
  2. In some people it might be, in others it will not be.

    According to Nester and co-workers from heel off to toe off the motion of the forefoot on the rearfoot about the midtarsal joint generates an axis which is due to either: inversion, dorsiflexion and abduction or eversion, plantarflexion and adduction. Viz, neither pronation nor supination.

    Nester C.J., Findlow A., Bowker P.: Scientific Approach to the Axis of Rotation at the Midtarsal Joint. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 91(2): 68-73, 2001

    The motion of the rearfoot relative to the forefoot is also dependent upon whether these segments are moving in-phase or anti-phase with one another, which varies between individuals.

    Chang R, Van Emerick R, Hamill J: Quantifying rearfoot-forefoot coordination in Human Walking. Journal of Biomechanics (41) 3101-3105, 2008

    Ask your lecturer the answer THEY are looking for, its probably not the truth though...
  3. Better yet, ask your lecturer to provide you with any current research done within the past 30 years that validates the presence of the "longitudinal midtarsal joint"...and that means new research.....not reporting on research from over 50 years ago.
  4. :good: Kevin, I'd just been glancing at the date and thinking that Chris was doing that midtarsal work over a decade ago. I was musing to myself- "I wonder how long it will take for undergraduate teaching to move forward?". I guess were on the same page :drinks If the lecturers aren't current, how do we expect the new graduates to take all of this on, when you and I and our ilk are gone? Having worked in education, I know from first hand that some lecturers get lazy and don't see any problem in not staying up to date, and churning out the same old, same old, year after year... clearly a decade nor half a century mean little to this teacher.

    Meanwhile, I had a new graduate show up at my office with an apparent desire to learn more about biomechanics today... we'll see how keen he really is, if he responds here... he wanted to refer a patient to me, I said he should sit in on my assessment as he would learn more, he said he was really busy.... now, if when I was a few months out of college I'd have received such an offer from an experienced colleague, I'd have moved a patient to make that happen... I guess learning biomechanics doesn't hold the same gravitas as cutting toe-nails and earning money these days. Never mind.
  5. blinda

    blinda MVP

    Which is why you owe it to yourself and the profession to do something about it now. As you know, there is an initiative to fill university research posts for leaders in our field within the next year.

    Whilst chatting to Kevin at the Summer School, he mentioned that he hoped that others would take his work forward after he is gone, as part of his legacy (sorry to talk about you as if you're not in the room, Kevin....does he take sugar?). Think about it.
  6. One can do quite a bit for one's profession without being a full time faculty member at a university or podiatric medical school. As a matter of fact, I have never been a full time faculty at CCPM or CSPM. The most I ever lectured there was once per month. Now I lecture about 3 times a year.

    I don't think I would have done well as a full time lecturer...I would not have had a lot of patience for fellow faculty members wanting to teach old material that is not current (i.e. longitudinal midtarsal joint axis). Rather, I believe that it has been much better for me to be outside the confines of the podiatric medical school, being independent by having my own private practice, and trying to move our profession forward by doing research, writing and lecturing on my own schedule.

    Dr. Spooner has already made an impact on the intellectual growth of our profession. I expect that he will continue to do so for many years to come. :drinks
  7. Setting the selection criteria at 40+ high quality papers, international recognition, extensive grant income to a University and having expertise in podiatric biomechanics, might just limit their field, in my opinion. The words" "unrealistic" and "expectations" spring to mind :morning:
  8. blinda

    blinda MVP

    I agree and am sure he will. Like many others, I have learnt much from Simon both here and from his published work. A full time lecturing post could prove to be counter productive and I was not suggesting that at all. The UK government initiative for research posts (which are a mixture of full and part time, and not all demanding 40+ papers...) are advertised as resulting in associate professorship for those taking the lead in their field. I was actually affording him a compliment.

    As we were discussing earlier, as a private practitioner in the UK it is virtually impossible to obtain ethical approval and insurance to carry out research if you are not employed by a university. So I guess the attraction of a part time uni post is greater here.
  9. davidh

    davidh Podiatry Arena Veteran

    unless of course you are carrying out research under the auspices of a university (ie as part of a higher degree).
  10. Peter

    Peter Well-Known Member

    Not at Teesside it doesn't. I wanted to do a RCT for my MSc dissertation, but tees ethics wouldn't allow it, and had to do a systematic review instead.
  11. blinda

    blinda MVP

    Which is my point. `They` don`t make it easy for wannabe researchers here in the UK. Sorry to have taken this thread off topic. Whinge over.

    BTW, Southampton may not have a rep for teaching state of the art biomechanics, but it was put to us that there is no such thing as a midtarsal joint axis in isolation and that the function of anatomical tissue is where it is at.

  12. I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean?
  13. blinda

    blinda MVP

    Sorry, think I`ve taken too much codeine.....I meant we were taught MSK examination and functional anatomy, rather than any particular biomech paradigm. Not a bad thing, IMO. It was suggested that desription of the position of the MJA should not be oversimplified with just supination or pronation (nor can it 'lock') and we were encouraged to read Nesters work.

    Does that make sense? Ah, just realised I omitted `longitudinal` from my post. Should have read "no such thing as a longitudinal midtarsal joint axis...."

    Think I need a holiday.
  14. Hallux29

    Hallux29 Welcome New Poster

    Thank you all for your replies!
  15. Rob Kidd

    Rob Kidd Well-Known Member

    Not sure what to say to the above discourse. When I was a PhD student, my first line supervisor (as against the figurehead) used to recon that 5 papers a year in journals such as "The Journal of Anatomy, The American Journal of Physical Anthropology, the Journal of Human Evolution, The Journal of Comparative Human Biology) was about right for one looking for promotion to Senior Lecturer from a routine lecturer (whatever the words are in your country). The truth is that one simply does not get promotion on academic ground to a senior position on less than about 40-50 papers and a grant record. One of my Sons-in-law is currently publishing 10-12 papers a year in serious journals - and also has ARC grants. Perhaps it is time to say less about what is required to achieve university positions, and more time to actually do it. Rob
  16. Personally, I went from a research assistant to lecturer to senior lecturer to principal lecturer with far fewer publications than that. A quick scan of Prof. Jim Woodburn's CV reveals 12 publications, of which he's first author on six. For the record, I've nothing against Jim, I just picked that as an example. I wonder how many publications Chris Nester had when he was made a professor, again just as an example? But you're right, we should just get on with doing it. Therein lies the problem...

    I think one of the issues Blinda is pointing out is that anyone sitting outside of the University employee should find it difficult to engage in any research in which ethical approval is required here in the UK. Thus, it is difficult to enter into an academic research post within a University, simply because your publication and clearly your grant winning record will not be up to scratch. Sure you could give up your salary and take a research student position, but not many people can afford the luxury of this. Rather. some people want to carry-out and publish clinical research while maintaining their private practice. In the UK at the moment, this is becoming increasingly less possible.
  17. The "40 published papers" requirement seems rather odd, overly-restrictive and unrealistic to me for a minimum. It could be that they are just trying to exclude podiatrists in general from applying to the position.

    I'm with Simon and Bel on this one. The academic side of podiatry should not be so isolated from the clinical world that an academic clinician finds it impossible to carry out research in their respective countries. Certainly there needs to be some leeway allowed in each country to carry out this important and necessary research that we all would benefit from.
  18. Cathi

    Cathi Member

    What about NHS podiatrists maybe taking things forward - they have access to grants, related patient caseloads and in some cases have strong University links... It is what the other professions do.
  19. Peter

    Peter Well-Known Member

    Unfortunately, the grim reality is that NHS Pods are increasingly getting their nose to the grindstone treating pts, as NHS managers are beating their staff with the AQP stick/re-banding stick/value for money stick, ad nauseum.
  20. And some of us are in private practice! What if the people with the know-how aren't employed by the NHS or a University? Why should these people be blocked from carrying out meaningful research?
  21. Peter

    Peter Well-Known Member

    They shouldn't, in fact I would guess the barriers are probably higher in PP.
  22. Oh yes. That's why Blinda can't get ethical approval nor insurance to run her RCT, despite that fact that she's more knowledgable and experienced in that particular area than most others and moreover, willing to fund the research herself.
  23. Here's another example, from another thread posted here recently. The advert is for a lecturer in podiatry in Australia at place with the same name as a city in the North East of England:

    "Selection Criteria

    1. Recognised degree in Podiatry
    2. Completed PhD in Podiatry or related field
    3. Eligibility for registration with the Podiatry Board of Australia
    etc, etc."

    From their application form: "Your application must include a statement addressing the selection criteria"
    And that selection criteria rules you out of the running for starters Kirby, Payne etc... and dare I say the vast majority of lecturers currently working in podiatric education around the world and many other talented individuals who I'm sure should make excellent lecturers.

    How many of the lecturers currently working at the podiatry school in question hold a PhD in podiatry or related field? How many PhD qualified podiatrists (you got to be eligible for registration with the Podiatry Board of Australia remember) exist A) in Australia, B) worldwide? :bash:
  24. Rob Kidd

    Rob Kidd Well-Known Member

    Certainly the Head of the school you mention has a PhD; I am not sure about the other staff. I am fairly certain that all the full time staff of the school with which I was last associated have a PhD. I was the first podiatrist in Australia with a PhD; that was 1994. The world has moved on a huge distant since then. In my last full time position (sort-of head of anatomy), the school I was working in had 100% PhD's among its staff; you simply do not get a job in science without one. Whether we like it or like it not, that is the world we live in now. I think you will find that nearly all podiatry teaching staff in Australia either have a PhD or are working towards one; there will be the odd exception though. As to absolute numbers in Australia, I make a gestimate of perhaps 25-30. An ex PhD student of mine (Tony Duffin) is a very successful private practitioner in the northern suburbs of Sydney, and I know of one hospital podiatrist in West Australia with a PhD. Rob
  25. When I got my PhD I was among the first handful of UK podiatrists with this qualification and certainly there are more now. Some are achieved by different routes now, but that's another story.

    Here's the staffing at Latrobe- 6 with PhD, 9 without. Personally, I think this is impressive. http://www.latrobe.edu.au/health/about/staff/all?areaofstudy=Podiatry

    University of Newcastle only appear to have 4 Podiatry staff, with 1 PhD and the others without.

    Here's Queeen Maragaret's University in Edinburgh, they seem to have 3 staff with PhD's and 7 without http://www.qmu.ac.uk/pod/staff.htm

    Bob, I think your contention that "you simply do not get a job in science without one (a PhD). is over-stated.
  26. Rob Kidd

    Rob Kidd Well-Known Member

    Perhaps you miss the point - I have two lives - 1) podiatry - and that has been only a tenuous connection for many years, and 2) hard science - comparative anatomy. It is the latter to which I was referring to. I do not regard podiatry, or any other health science, including medicine, as science in this context.

    Also, please note, I did say either have one or are working towards one. I think you will find that those none PhD grads are PhD students - with the odd exception. Rob

    Its now 12 hours since I wrote the above, but am still able to edit (presumably because it has not been accessed). You make the following comments: "When I got my PhD I was among the first handful of UK podiatrists with this qualification and certainly there are more now. Some are achieved by different routes now, but that's another story. " I assume you are referring to Professional Doctorates, etc.. These are fine for what they are, but not a PhD. Let us be quite clear. I am surprised that you seemed to have doubts about this. These are professional qualifications, perhaps on the same vein as a DPM - a professional, not a research qualification. One of my oldest friends, my Best Man even, has a professional Doctorate, but I am sure he would not regard this as the same as a PhD. Rob
  27. Rob:

    As Simon clearly states, the PhD degree is nice to have in some cases, but certainly not a requirement to become part of the teaching institution in a podiatric medical college. In fact, it is more common for faculty at the American Podiatric Medical Colleges to not have a PhD.

    For example, I have included the full-time and part-time faculty list for the California School of Podiatric Medicine below. You will notice that there are only 2 PhDs out of a total of 12 full time faculty members.

    From my persepective as a podiatry student, I would have much rather had an academically oreinted non-PhD podiatrist, such as Dr. Josh Gerbert, teaching me about how to treat feet than a PhD podiatrist who has spent very little time actually treating patients. I do respect the PhD degree. However, in my years of experience of attending lectures and meeting podatrists from all over my country and all over the world, very many of the best clinicians and teachers within podiatry never got a PhD.

    Therefore, we again get to Simon's original point....why restrict podiatric faculty members to having a PhD when, in actuality, by doing so, we are likely preventing some of the best teachers within podiatry from educating our students?
  28. Bob, clearly doesn't consider research in podiatry or other branches of medicine as being "hard science", whereas looking at fossils presumably is. For the record my PhD was in genetics, so I'm hoping that this makes me a "hard" scientist too.
  29. Rob Kidd

    Rob Kidd Well-Known Member

    You are getting personal Boys - my writings are never personal. Whether like it or like it not, the academic world we live in, at least for those schools of podiatry with the "British model" , hold a PhD as the bench mark. In the 70's and 80's we strived to attain this - and now it seems we are complaining that we have got it. I wrote and presented a conference paper once titled "progress with no change" with a particular slant on this mentality. Simon, you are mixing what the staff are, per se, and what the profression is; you might have a PhD in genetics, but that does not make your podiatry practice hard science IMHO. It does however, make your genetics research and your genetics publications hard science. It is a mistake to get personal - destroys an argument. Rob
  30. Rob:

    I don't quite see how I was getting personal. Please point out where I was getting personal in this conversation.

    I am still interested in furthering this discussion since this subject seems to be quite important to many talented would-be teachers and professors who may or may not have a PhD.

    Please answer this question:

    Is a PhD required in order to be an effective and valuable teacher of the clinical practice of podiatry for our podiatry students?
  31. Rob Kidd

    Rob Kidd Well-Known Member

    "Is a PhD required in order to be an effective and valuable teacher of the clinical practice of podiatry for our podiatry students?"

    I would say no, but that is not the whole job description of a university lecturer. Unless specifically described as such, all university academic staff are required to both teach and research. And therein lies the rub: to research, they (universities) would argue, you do need research training, and the bench mark research training in their eyes is a PhD. I didn't make the rules - I have simply followed them for 30 years.

    And of course, totally accepted by all, research informs teaching of students - otherwise they get out of date stuff from out of date staff - which I believe is where this discussion came in. Rob
  32. I'm not getting personal, Bob. I am getting confused by your answers. At first you stated that "you don't get a job in science without a PhD", the job in question being as a lecturer in podiatry. When I pointed out that there are many individuals working as lecturers in podiatry without PhD's, you then seemed to change the emphasis and stated that you needed a PhD for a job in "hard science" but contended that podiatry is not a "hard science". Thus, by intimation you suggest that since PhD's are required for hard science, but since podiatry is not a hard science, you do not need a PhD to be a podiatry lecturer. Kevin added his comments and now you appear to be saying that you do need a PhD to be a podiatry lecturer. Which is it?:confused:

    When does a science become a "hard" science?
  33. Rob Kidd

    Rob Kidd Well-Known Member

    Perhaps it is the way I write. When I said "you don't get a job in science without a PhD", the school I was in was not podiatry - it was the School of Science, Food and Horticulture at the Uni of Western Sydney; I was "sort-of" head of anatomy - there was no podiatry in this school.
    I am making no quality judgements by my contention that podiatry - or any other branch of medicine is not a hard science, but I stand by it; music is not hard science - but is good. If you read again my comment to Kevin you will see that I suggested that to teach pod students does not require a PhD, but to be a Lecturer of podiatry (which is not the same thing) is analagous to being a lecturer of anything else - you are required to teach and research - and thus one does need a PhD. Although I have been away from the UK a long time (22 years), I had thought that at one point you had an academic appointment; thus you will have understood the research/teaching balance. All of us that have (had) an academic appointment have this balance, and where we draw the line between the two is up to you and your first line manager: I have really only aimed at 2-3 publications a years, and thus think of myself as a teacher first and foremost; others , like my son-in-law, by way of example, publish 10-14 papers a year, and teach relatively little.

    I am failing to understand the fuss; are we an academic profession or not? At the end of the day, there is a line in chalk in the school playground - the small boys patch, or the big boys patch: which side do you wish to play?

    It may help to explain that, when I was Head of school of Pod in 1995-2000, we had a 4 year course with an imbedded honours programme. I made huge efforts to ensure that the kids that did not do honours were not made to feel inferior. I insisted that we had two streams - an academic speciality stream, and a clinical experts stream. The point being that to be a clinical expert was just as important, but different. (in Ozz, the norm is NOT a 3 year hons program)

  34. Rob:

    By using your analagy, since I don't have a PhD, I should be playing in the small boys patch? Is that what you are intimating? So you are now saying that if a profession such as podiatry wants to be academic then it must have PhDs teaching the students since the PhDs are the big boys and all the rest of us non-PhDs are the small boys?
  35. Rob Kidd

    Rob Kidd Well-Known Member

    I am simply saying whether we like or like it not - and I do not make the rules - those schools that have the "British Model" (UK, NZ, S. Africa, Australia) are all in universities where the gold standard bench mark is a PhD. If you applied for a position in science at any of those institutions, without a PhD it would not get looked at. And, while ten years ago, or perhaps even 5 years ago (and I speak for Australia here), an appointment might have been made in podiatry (or OT, or Physio etc) without a PhD as long as there was a promise of one in the near futre - ie near completion. Now, as Simon pointed out for the Newcastle advert, a PhD was an essential criteria. These are simple facts; whether right or wrong is not the point: it is. I never men tioned American schools as they do not have what is loosely called "The Brtish Model". And apart from that, I have been to every school in the world that has "The British Model": I have only been to one US school
  36. Rob:

    I fully realize what the models are for podiatry schools in the UK, Australia and the States. However, Rob, I asked what you meant by the statement: "At the end of the day, there is a line in chalk in the school playground - the small boys patch, or the big boys patch: which side do you wish to play?" Sounds to me like you are saying that the "big boys" are the men (and women) who have PhDs and the "small boys" are the men (and women) who don't have PhDs, which, to me, sounds rather degrading to those of us who do not have PhDs.

    Never mind. I guess I will continue just being one of the "small boys" who sees no "line of chalk in the school playground", but rather decides who to play with by the intelligence, knowledge and motivation of the individual, rather than by what letters they have following their names. I just wish those people who determine who will be educating our students could show a little more reasonableness with the minimum degrees they accept for teaching and research positions so that the best faculty members can be chosen for the job, not just the few who have attained a doctor of philosophy degree.
  37. Rob Kidd

    Rob Kidd Well-Known Member

    Kevin, the analogy to the school playground was nothing to do with you - nor anyone else; my postings are never personal. To put it in context, when I was a pod student in the early 70's, and then a UK teacher of Pod until 1990 (when I left the UK for Ozz), all staff were critical of the fact that the course was in a college of higher education. In its way way a good institution, but not a university. The profession fought, eventually successfully, to have their courses in universities - fine. However that brings new set of paradigms; College of higher ed staff rarely researched or published, now the world has moved on. That is (by my analogy), we have crossed the chalk line in the school playground. But you have to cross with both feet; one cannot argue for a university course, and expect to be different from other university courses. My mentor once said to me that only real definition of education is that process which brings about a permanent change of behaviour - one cannot go back, nor can one look for exceptions - except on a purely temporary basis while staff play "catch up". Rob
  38. Woodburn

    Woodburn Active Member

    In reply to S. Spooner- my CV, professorship and professional integrity

    Dear colleagues,

    The following information posted on this site by Simon Spooner was recently brought to my attention,

    "Personally, I went from a research assistant to lecturer to senior lecturer to principal lecturer with far fewer publications than that. A quick scan of Prof. Jim Woodburn's CV reveals 12 publications, of which he's first author on six. For the record, I've nothing against Jim, I just picked that as an example."

    I've nothing against you either Simon but I'm surprised you didnt take two minutes of your time to verify your information or explain to the readership the difference between first and senior authorship. Not even a quick PubMed search?

    My CV is freely available to anyone to review and it shows more that 12 publications. Moreover, the criteria for appointment at professorial level at Glasgow Caledonian University are also freely available. You are at liberty to align CV to appointment criteria and make your own mind up if I make the grade for key indicators such as publications, grants, and other scholarly activity commensurate with the post.

    I'd like to make this public that I am referring this post to our professional body for consideration.

    Best wishes,
    Professor Jim Woodburn
  39. Re: In reply to S. Spooner- my CV, professorship and professional integrity

    Jim, I'm at a loss as to why you feel it necessary to refer this post to the professional body, however, it is your prerogative. Here is the quote in context:

    As you can see Rob Kidd had stated that he felt that a senior academic position could not (nor should not) be achieved without a publication record of 40-50 papers. I was merely pointing out that senior academic position can and have been achieved with far fewer papers than this. At the time of writing the original post, I accessed your CV from your staff profile of your current employer, by typing the search terms Prof. Jim Woodburn CV into google: http://www.gcu.ac.uk/hls/staff/profjameswoodburn/ I have accessed it again today 17/10/2012. As you can see, it clearly lists you as holding the position of Professor and lists 12 publications. Which are:


    Turner DE Davys HJ Woodburn J Foot function following forefoot reconstruction in rheumatoid arthritis. Aus J Pod Med 2005;39:83-9

    Helliwell PS Allen N Gilworth G Redmond A Slade A Tennant A Woodburn J Development of a foot impact scale for rheumatoid arthritis Arthritis Rheum 2005;53:418-22

    Woodburn J Cornwall MW Soames RW Helliwell PS Selectively attenuating soft-tissues close to sites of inflammation in the peri-talar region of patients with rheumatoid arthritis leads to the development of pes planovalgus J Rheumatol 2005;32:268-74

    Davys HJ Turner DE Helliwell PS Conaghan PG Emery P Woodburn J Debridement of plantar callosities in rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized controlled trial Rheumatology (Oxford) 2005 44: 207-210

    Woodburn J Nelson KM Lohmann Siegel K Kepple TM Gerber LH Multisegment foot motion during gait: proof of concept in rheumatoid arthritis J Rheumatol 2004;31:1918-27

    Goldbach-Mansky RP Woodburn J Yao L Lipsky P Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the evaluation of bone damage in patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Arthritis Rheum 2003;48:585-9

    Waxman R Woodburn H Powell M Woodburn J Blackburn S Helliwell P FOOTSTEP: A randomised controlled trial investigating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a patient self-management programme for basic foot care in the elderly J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56:1092-9

    Woodburn J Helliwell PS Barker S Changes in three-dimensional joint kinematics supports the continuous use of foot orthoses in the management of painful rearfoot deformity in rheumatoid arthritis J Rheumatol 2003;30:2356-64

    Turner DE Woodburn J Helliwell PS Cornwall ME Emery P Pes planovalgus in rheumatoid arthritis: a descriptive and analytical study of foot function determined by gait analysis. Musculoskeletal Care 2003;1:21-33
    Woodburn J Udupa JK Hirsch BE Wakefield RJ Helliwell PS Reay N O’Connor P Budgen A Emery P The geometrical architecture of the subtalar and midtarsal joints in rheumatoid arthritis based on MR imaging Arthritis Rheum 2002;46:3168-3177

    Woodburn J Helliwell PS Barker S Three-dimensional kinematics at the ankle joint complex in rheumatoid arthritis patients with painful valgus deformity of the rearfoot Rheumatology (Oxford) 2002;41:1406-12

    Woodburn J Helliwell PS Barker S A randomized controlled trial of foot orthoses in rheumatoid arthritis J Rheumatol 2002;29:1377-83"

    This may or may not be out-dated, but I cannot be held responsible for Glasgow Calledonian University keeping it's staff profile pages up to date. Notwithstanding, it clearly shows that at the time this profile was published by your employer, you were a professor with 12 publications listed. Viz. it is possible to achieve a senior academic position with fewer than 40-50 publication- which was the moot point.

    Now, I am not saying that you are not academically credible, nor that you do not meet the criteria for a professorial position at your institute. I am not even saying that you have not published further studies since the staff page at Glasgow was published. What and all I was saying is that Rob Kidd's contention that one should not, nor could not expect to achieve as senior academic position without 40-50 publications is plainly erroneous.

    I hope this makes my position clear as it was not my intention to cause any offence to you Jim. Quite the contrary. I was defending those who may be in senior academic positions and doing a fantastic job without the 40-50 publication which Rob Kidd suggested were necessary to hold such a position.

    Best wishes,
  40. Rob Kidd

    Rob Kidd Well-Known Member

    Simon, why have you dragged me in to this? My comments in earlier posts re: 40-50 publications were based upon what I had learned from several years of sitting on academic promotions committees; those are the bench marks that I was brought to understand for appointments to the Professoriate (ie senior academic positions). The comment re: 5-6 papers a years was made by my mentor and friend, Professor Paul O'Higgins, Chair of Anatomy, HYMS, when he was applying for SL promotion in Western Australia. What I have said, I stand by as truth as I know it, to anyone. I would suggest, respectively, that if you look around universities generally, senior staff will have publications in this order, and a grant record; if they didn't they would not be there. Rob

Share This Page