massage and bodywork professionals
a community of practitioners
What are your thoughts on ABMP's survey showing falling enrollment at massage schools and many small schools closing?
Views: 1562
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Gary W Addis, LMT on
-
The cost of the schools surely has a lot to do with it. Mine for instance: $32k in loans, 18 months to the 750 hrs, 2 years to the AAS degree.
But quicker ain't necessarily better. New regulations in the state... changed from credit hour to clock hour. New students now complete the hrs in 9 months, but crowding NMT; DT; Eastern modalities; and Special Population Massages (Geriatric, Sports, Reflexology and Pregnancy) into one 12 wk quarter is maybe shortchanging the students-- or, rather the clients they'll be trying to treat in just a few months. Under the old system, each of those modalities extended over its own 12 wk period--lots more time, more bodies massaged, to develop the touch.
Alexei Levine said:Actually I don't know if ABMP has released this survey to the general public, (I run a school that participated in the survey) here's a link to a news item about the results of the survey:
http://www.skininc.com/spabusiness/trends/120593874.html
In my anecdotal opinion the industry is booming and growing in my area, Massachusetts. A declining student enrollment may be indicative of other factors at play, like the economic recession, and trends in for-profit education.
-
Permalink Reply by Therese Schwartz on
-
Gary - I didn't realize how much your school was costing! Wow! I've been impressed with your dedication to learning a new profession and the investment you are making causes me to be more impressed. So many people would give up before they started because of that. The difference for you and your classmates with your system is that you will be so much more comfortable and competent going out and working on people.
My school was 635 clock hours. We did Eastern modalities in a few nights, not sure we even did NMT but it would have been 2 nights, Reflexology - 2 nights, Strain Counterstrain - 2 nights, etc...having said that, our instructor did tell us that we didn't have time to go in depth in any of those things and if they were interesting we needed to take continuing education. But that lack of time invested in different modalities tends to produce "one trick ponies".
So we graduated with a good idea of Swedish massage and a good idea of deep tissue - although no matter what she said about not using too much force, our instructor worked painfully deep on all of us and that's what people remember. So I basically had to throw out 90% of what I learned in school 2 years ago (2 years after I graduated) because it was tearing my body up and wasn't good for my clients.
I am glad you got in under the old system - I think you are learning some really useful things rather than simply putting in the hours needed to get a license and then having to learn on the fly!
-
-
Yeah, me too. But the system depends on the quality of instructors. Some are very very good; others are a waste of air. And some of the textbooks used are evidently the cheapest on the market (incl in tuition). Like a paragraph-length paper expanded into book length by stating the same blankety nonsense chapter after chapter. Out of all that tuition money, you'd think they could afford to issue us our own paperback copies of Travell & Simons' textbooks. Davies' trigger point manual is a great little book (our only NMT textbook) but there is so much more out there! Luckily, one of the instructors took a liking to me; about to retire, he has given me a couple of really good, really expensive NMT books out of his own library. And Gordon has taught me quite a lot sometimes without knowing he is doing it.
There's a new thingee out there called "lateral stretching"-- its chief cheerleader claims that using it you don't need to find the referring trigger point-- of course, to relieve the pain requires 2-3 weeks of 3-5 15 minute sessions per week-- But the treatments are painless, she says. Personally, I think clients would prefer 2-30 seconds of ischemic compression to get it over with.
My DT instructor hated deep pressure, so we were essentially giving one another slightly heavy effleurage w/ forearms till we got into NMT the next quarter with an instructor who actually took away pain.
I should complete the req number of clinic intern massages today, and get scheduled for the licensing exams. (Since the school will pay for both, I'm taking both the national and the mblex).
-
-
I guess no school is perfect! That is frustrating. I have 2 clients who are trying to find massage schools and it's damned near impossible in Oklahoma! I told them to find a place that works, get the hours and graduate, then take continuing education classes. It's awful that you have to deal with a sub-par situation.
Congratulations are in order - you are so very close to being done!! I'm very interested in your thoughts on the exams - I've very carefully and successfully avoided taking any national certification (or CranioSacral certification, which I could and should do!). My excuse is test anxiety but I think I just don't want to work hard enough to study for any of it! :)
-
Permalink Reply by Gerry Bunnell on
-
If you look at the rates of tuition that some schools are charging, massage education is alive and well. Having investigated several colleges in the area, I've found 2 that charge between 17,000 and 20,000 for a massage education. Another charges close to 27,000. This is do to their ability to provide financial aid. This rate of tuition allows for greater advertising that the small schools can't compete with.
-
Permalink Reply by Daniel Cohen on
-
It is rediculous for entry level massage. And for this our tax dollars subsidize the large schools.making competition from small schools nearly impossible.
Gerry Bunnell said:If you look at the rates of tuition that some schools are charging, massage education is alive and well. Having investigated several colleges in the area, I've found 2 that charge between 17,000 and 20,000 for a massage education. Another charges close to 27,000. This is do to their ability to provide financial aid. This rate of tuition allows for greater advertising that the small schools can't compete with.
-
Permalink Reply by Relax & Rejuvenate on
-
Gerry Bunnell said:If you look at the rates of tuition that some schools are charging, massage education is alive and well. Having investigated several colleges in the area, I've found 2 that charge between 17,000 and 20,000 for a massage education. Another charges close to 27,000. This is do to their ability to provide financial aid. This rate of tuition allows for greater advertising that the small schools can't compete with.
This is precisely what is wrong with the government being involved in education -- or anything else they subsidize out of the ;misguided notion having more "educated" citizens is a good thing.
They required the curriculum to be X hours with Y subjects in order to be accredited. Being accredited means you can offer financial aid. Financial aid means people are buying more tuition than they can reasonably afford (sounds a lot like getting a mortgage, and look where that got us)
An extra $5k in tuition means an extra $50 a month in a student loan payment -- that's one massage -- who is going to miss that?!?!?!
But then you find massage tuitions skyrocketing (duh, 4 year college tuition increases are the ONLY thing in our economy rising faster than health care costs, and it just happens to coincide with more calls for financial aid for college tuitioin and subisdized loan rates), fewer people enrolling overall, and those that do, tend to go to the larger schools with the financial aid machine.
What we are seeing is not what is wrong with massage education, or even what is wrong with other forms of higher education. It is what is wrong with our government thinking it is responsible for cradle-to-grave coddling and buying votes with other people's money.
Keep that in mind come November.
-
-
We have an intitutionized two party system. Not what the United States has advised in other countries where democracy has been established. Everywhere else but home the USA insists on a multiparty system. Won't really matter for massage education which party's pocket you decide to open up for the money spill.
We have a problem in this country thinking bigger is better. From experiences I would say tthe middle ground is best. Not too small and not too big, but just right. Is there any chance we can stop the growth in tuition and hours before it is beyond control? How many Therapists working more than 10 years would have gotten into this field if the hours and tuition stated above existed then?
-
Permalink Reply by Kathy Mackay on
-
How many Therapists working more than 10 years would have gotten into this field if the hours and tuition stated above existed then?
Excellent question Daniel. I certainly would not have pursued it. The current push will eliminate excellent therapists from ever entering the field.
-
-
If all education were as free (to the qualified!) as grade school, that too would eliminate the problem, right? I interviewed author Robert B. Parker for a Writer's Digest article years ago. He was a Harvard professor; he worked a total of 4 hours per week (2 lectures, grad students did the grading) and was paid what he admitted was a ridiculous sum for it. THAT has nothing to do w/ government.
The rest of the civilized world provides free- not merely subsidized, or via loans, but free-- higher education for all who demo an ability to learn, and they are advancing and we are declining.
R&R, guv'mint ain't the evil; the evil sits in the boardrooms, like Mittens, sucking 10-fold profits by closing American plants and then financing their reopening in China. If the 1% could develop a way to outsource massage and make a financial killing off it, they would.
The middle class is necessary, and the big boys are doing everything in their power to destroy it. As Mitch McConnell infamously remarked, the number one job of Republicans is getting the black dude out of the WH, even if that requires the destruction of the American economy.
Big Business uncontrolled gives us ruinous oil spills and poisoned aquifers and clear cutting of our few remaining giant Sequoias, and privatization of all public services. This nation was number one for standard of living when the top tax rate was 80%--and I never saw a millionaire in a bread line. Now, I think most would appreciate it if you, and I, refrain from arguing politics within a massage forum. We can continue this via private messaging if you like.
BTW, the tuition is already beyond control: mine cost me $32,000 in student loans and interest. But that is hardly the fault of people out of work trying to find a way to earn a living--the fault belongs to the laws that encourage and permit corporate gorging at the public trough. If the Republicans force the issue and don't extend the control on the interest that will otherwise end in July, a very large percentage will be forced into default. And THAT will seriously hurt the economy overall.
Regarding the "more education", a large uneducated workforce will certainly hold the wages for everyone down (including massage therapists). But, seriously, do you think we can compete with Chinese and Indian labor--they'll work for $10 per day and love it. People living under stairwells and in wrecked cars can't survive on that. While attending massage school, I'm surviving on my Social Security, $33 per day, and there's always 3 weeks left at the end of the check.
When wages go up due to more people receiving higher education, the number of people who can afford a massage increases.
Relax & Rejuvenate said:
Gerry Bunnell said:If you look at the rates of tuition that some schools are charging, massage education is alive and well. Having investigated several colleges in the area, I've found 2 that charge between 17,000 and 20,000 for a massage education. Another charges close to 27,000. This is do to their ability to provide financial aid. This rate of tuition allows for greater advertising that the small schools can't compete with.
This is precisely what is wrong with the government being involved in education -- or anything else they subsidize out of the ;misguided notion having more "educated" citizens is a good thing.
They required the curriculum to be X hours with Y subjects in order to be accredited. Being accredited means you can offer financial aid. Financial aid means people are buying more tuition than they can reasonably afford (sounds a lot like getting a mortgage, and look where that got us)
An extra $5k in tuition means an extra $50 a month in a student loan payment -- that's one massage -- who is going to miss that?!?!?!
But then you find massage tuitions skyrocketing (duh, 4 year college tuition increases are the ONLY thing in our economy rising faster than health care costs, and it just happens to coincide with more calls for financial aid for college tuitioin and subisdized loan rates), fewer people enrolling overall, and those that do, tend to go to the larger schools with the financial aid machine.
What we are seeing is not what is wrong with massage education, or even what is wrong with other forms of higher education. It is what is wrong with our government thinking it is responsible for cradle-to-grave coddling and buying votes with other people's money.
Keep that in mind come November.
-
-
Gary W Addis said:If all education were as free (to the qualified!) as grade school, that too would eliminate the problem, right? I interviewed author Robert B. Parker for a Writer's Digest article years ago. He was a Harvard professor; he worked a total of 4 hours per week (2 lectures, grad students did the grading) and was paid what he admitted was a ridiculous sum for it. THAT has nothing to do w/ government.
It has EVERYTHING to do with government. Government subsidizes higher education by guaranteeing student loans -- not just the interest rate, the loans themselves. Just like Massage Schools offering financial aid. When something is subsidized/guaranteed by a bottom-less source of funds, there is no incentive to control costs -- which leads to outrageous tuition (Harvard's buildings/real estate etc are not 8x more expensive/valuable than City College of NY or UCLA, but their tuition is) to pay outrageous sums to Ivory Tower Gods to work 2 hours a week.
Its not about corporations or educational institutions -- it's about human nature. When things are in excess, they are wasted. When things are driven by supply and demand they are put to monitored closely and put to optimal use.
And, by the way, the government is inherently evil. EVERYTHING the government has -- its power, its $ -- every single thing -- once belonged to the citizenry. I am not saying that government is not necessary, but I recognize it is not inherently benevolent, quite the opposite, it is inherently inefficient and destructive. The government's power to pull you over for Drunk Driving solely exists because the citizen's agreed that the freedom to drive drunk is one worth giving up. But it is this same power that has been corrupted by human nature that gives the police to pull someone over for driving while Black.
Don't forget, our republic existed for 100+ years without a penny of federal income tax being extracted from the citizens. Trillions have been spent on eradicating poverty, yet a higher % of the citizens are now in poverty
Just think of the vitriol used in describing a ten year war that costs Billions -- not Trillions - and did not accomplish it's goal.
So what would you call a 50 year-long government effort to HELP its own citizens, but has made their condition worse, has increased crime (more Black American's die each year -- over 7,000,-- than have died in a decade of fighting in Iraq & Afghanistan COMBINED), and has left them worse off than when the government started helping them? Certainly not benevolent -- sounds pretty MALevolent to me. And that is just inner-city poverty -- Latinos and rural America has not been helped either.
-
Permalink Reply by Gordon J. Wallis on
-
I don't know...It just seems awfully expensive now. I went to school a long time ago..However one could bus tables in a restaurant and make enough money to pay for your tuition, as well as eat good food and pay your rent... I had 700 hours for my license. Total of a years time.. ..I didnt have to borrow money.. I worked, it was challenging...but I wasn't in debt when I received my license. Thats the difference...and its BIG. I went to school in 84 or 85.
Relax & Rejuvenate said:
Gary W Addis said:If all education were as free (to the qualified!) as grade school, that too would eliminate the problem, right? I interviewed author Robert B. Parker for a Writer's Digest article years ago. He was a Harvard professor; he worked a total of 4 hours per week (2 lectures, grad students did the grading) and was paid what he admitted was a ridiculous sum for it. THAT has nothing to do w/ government.
It has EVERYTHING to do with government. Government subsidizes higher education by guaranteeing student loans -- not just the interest rate, the loans themselves. Just like Massage Schools offering financial aid. When something is subsidized/guaranteed by a bottom-less source of funds, there is no incentive to control costs -- which leads to outrageous tuition (Harvard's buildings/real estate etc are not 8x more expensive/valuable than City College of NY or UCLA, but their tuition is) to pay outrageous sums to Ivory Tower Gods to work 2 hours a week.
Its not about corporations or educational institutions -- it's about human nature. When things are in excess, they are wasted. When things are driven by supply and demand they are put to monitored closely and put to optimal use.
And, by the way, the government is inherently evil. EVERYTHING the government has -- its power, its $ -- every single thing -- once belonged to the citizenry. I am not saying that government is not necessary, but I recognize it is not inherently benevolent, quite the opposite, it is inherently inefficient and destructive. The government's power to pull you over for Drunk Driving solely exists because the citizen's agreed that the freedom to drive drunk is one worth giving up. But it is this same power that has been corrupted by human nature that gives the police to pull someone over for driving while Black.
Don't forget, our republic existed for 100+ years without a penny of federal income tax being extracted from the citizens. Trillions have been spent on eradicating poverty, yet a higher % of the citizens are now in poverty
Just think of the vitriol used in describing a ten year war that costs Billions -- not Trillions - and did not accomplish it's goal.
So what would you call a 50 year-long government effort to HELP its own citizens, but has made their condition worse, has increased crime (more Black American's die each year -- over 7,000,-- than have died in a decade of fighting in Iraq & Afghanistan COMBINED), and has left them worse off than when the government started helping them? Certainly not benevolent -- sounds pretty MALevolent to me. And that is just inner-city poverty -- Latinos and rural America has not been helped either.
© 2024 Created by ABMP.
Powered by
