massage and bodywork professionals
a community of practitioners
Some MTBOK Clarifications
(Originally published on the MTBOK Project Managers blog at: http://mtbok.blogspot.com/)
Im pleased that we've begun to get responses already on the draft MTBOK, and its just what we are hoping for. Its also clear that the respondants are passionate about the profession, and have given thought to their responses.
As a task force of 8 trying to represent such a broad complex profession, we think its vital that we get feedback from the community. Thats why we have tried to make it easy to do so, why we have scheduled two drafts for review (the next update will be just after the first of the year) and why we are holding a public input session in Orlando, FL next week.
In reading over your comments though I can tell there is some misunderstanding about the approach we have taken and the impact of the MTBOK (at least in the near term). So I thought I would clear some of that up. Please keep in mind that Im going a little out on a limb here because Im not actually a member of the Task Force... but if they take issue with what I say here, I will relay that back to you as well.
* First, the MTBOK does not, and will not have force of law or regulation. Which means that whatever the final product includes will not change any State or local laws or regulations, at least in the near term. Over time we believe that the educators and regulators, etc will come to value a single, profession wide body of knowledge built by and for the profession as a valuable single source of authoritative information. We also believe that the reason for the wide range of requirements for certification/licensure across the country is a direct result of organizations individually trying to cope without a comprehensive, profession-wide adopted standard. We think the establishment of the MTBOK will help over time resolve a lot of the inconsistencies that you experience from jurisdiction to jurisdiction across the country.
* Some people have expressed concern that the required knowledge, skills and abilities (KSA) are too much for an entry level massage therapist. The Task Force believes that the MTBOK needs to grow with the knowledge and science that supports the profession, and has included some new areas that we believe therapists, even at the entry level, need to be exposed to. As in most of the knowledge areas, entry level therapists would not be expected to have in depth knowledge but would be expected to know what it is and what the general impact is on their work. This helps position a Massage Therapist to better guide their career and continuing education over time.
* The MTBOK is to be created by and for the profession. Which means that it is supposed to represent what our profession believes is the knowledge, skills and abilities necessary to perform their work. We want and need your input. Id suggest that as you look through the document, your approach should be to consider whether or not individual KSAs should be something that all therapists need to know and or do, not the details of implementation. If you disagree on something, tell us about it and why using the comment form.
* The task force is trying to be sure that the variety of work that is being performed by massage therapists is included in the scope and KSA requirements. Our field is broad, and the MTBOK hopefully represents that well. We are focused on Massage Therapy, and there is no attempt to try to bring other allied professions under the MTBOK. In fact, we have tried to invite non Massage Therapy organizations to comment so that any issues may be resolved before it is finalized. Since one of the ways a profession gets widely recognized is through the development and existence of a Body of Knowledge, we would encourage other allied professions to develop their own.
* Finally, the specific competencies (in terms of Knowledge Skills and Abilities) in the draft version of the MTBOK are for entry level therapists, and do not include the additional KSAs that are required as a massage therapist advances or specializes. The method of documenting these are not addressed in phase 1 of the MTBOK at all, and this work will be done later as appropriate. Phase 1 specifically notes that some of the work performed by massage therapists requires additional knowledge, certification and/or licensure. So, for example, although we believe all massage therapists should be exposed to non-western energy theory and the existence of meridians and points associated with these, it does not mean that this is adequate for a massage therapist to practice reflexology or acupressure without the appropriate additional study, certification and/or licensure.
I hope you will keep these points in mind as you read the draft MTBOK and that you do let us know what you agree or don't agree with.The effects of this wont be immediate, but I hope you will agree that the end result will significantly strengthen the foundation on which our amazing profession is built.
Im pleased that we've begun to get responses already on the draft MTBOK, and its just what we are hoping for. Its also clear that the respondants are passionate about the profession, and have given thought to their responses.
As a task force of 8 trying to represent such a broad complex profession, we think its vital that we get feedback from the community. Thats why we have tried to make it easy to do so, why we have scheduled two drafts for review (the next update will be just after the first of the year) and why we are holding a public input session in Orlando, FL next week.
In reading over your comments though I can tell there is some misunderstanding about the approach we have taken and the impact of the MTBOK (at least in the near term). So I thought I would clear some of that up. Please keep in mind that Im going a little out on a limb here because Im not actually a member of the Task Force... but if they take issue with what I say here, I will relay that back to you as well.
* First, the MTBOK does not, and will not have force of law or regulation. Which means that whatever the final product includes will not change any State or local laws or regulations, at least in the near term. Over time we believe that the educators and regulators, etc will come to value a single, profession wide body of knowledge built by and for the profession as a valuable single source of authoritative information. We also believe that the reason for the wide range of requirements for certification/licensure across the country is a direct result of organizations individually trying to cope without a comprehensive, profession-wide adopted standard. We think the establishment of the MTBOK will help over time resolve a lot of the inconsistencies that you experience from jurisdiction to jurisdiction across the country.
* Some people have expressed concern that the required knowledge, skills and abilities (KSA) are too much for an entry level massage therapist. The Task Force believes that the MTBOK needs to grow with the knowledge and science that supports the profession, and has included some new areas that we believe therapists, even at the entry level, need to be exposed to. As in most of the knowledge areas, entry level therapists would not be expected to have in depth knowledge but would be expected to know what it is and what the general impact is on their work. This helps position a Massage Therapist to better guide their career and continuing education over time.
* The MTBOK is to be created by and for the profession. Which means that it is supposed to represent what our profession believes is the knowledge, skills and abilities necessary to perform their work. We want and need your input. Id suggest that as you look through the document, your approach should be to consider whether or not individual KSAs should be something that all therapists need to know and or do, not the details of implementation. If you disagree on something, tell us about it and why using the comment form.
* The task force is trying to be sure that the variety of work that is being performed by massage therapists is included in the scope and KSA requirements. Our field is broad, and the MTBOK hopefully represents that well. We are focused on Massage Therapy, and there is no attempt to try to bring other allied professions under the MTBOK. In fact, we have tried to invite non Massage Therapy organizations to comment so that any issues may be resolved before it is finalized. Since one of the ways a profession gets widely recognized is through the development and existence of a Body of Knowledge, we would encourage other allied professions to develop their own.
* Finally, the specific competencies (in terms of Knowledge Skills and Abilities) in the draft version of the MTBOK are for entry level therapists, and do not include the additional KSAs that are required as a massage therapist advances or specializes. The method of documenting these are not addressed in phase 1 of the MTBOK at all, and this work will be done later as appropriate. Phase 1 specifically notes that some of the work performed by massage therapists requires additional knowledge, certification and/or licensure. So, for example, although we believe all massage therapists should be exposed to non-western energy theory and the existence of meridians and points associated with these, it does not mean that this is adequate for a massage therapist to practice reflexology or acupressure without the appropriate additional study, certification and/or licensure.
I hope you will keep these points in mind as you read the draft MTBOK and that you do let us know what you agree or don't agree with.The effects of this wont be immediate, but I hope you will agree that the end result will significantly strengthen the foundation on which our amazing profession is built.
Views: 19
Comment
-
Comment by Chip Hines on September 27, 2009 at 8:17am
-
Great Noel - I will be sure this message train gets to the Task Force so they hear your concerns. Id also like you to know that I appreciate your willingness to serve, and to participate by getting your concerns to us.
-
Comment by Noel Norwick on September 26, 2009 at 1:09pm
-
Chip: Thanks for the clarification and update re the MTF research literacy program. For what it's worth, I'm unaware of research literacy (and the ongoing debate re legal risks involved with using quantitative vs. qualitative medical/healthcare research or between using generally accepted medical best practice protocols vs. evidence based practice of medicine) being an entry level subject in any major university healthcare programs. In short, this "competency" seems way beyond what public safety and/or market demand (ability and willingness to pay for) require of entry level massage/bodywork practitioners.
As someone who thought long and hard before volunteering to be part of the task force, (but was not selected), please be assured that I fully appreciate what the task has and will do for the profession. I'm appreciate knowing that my concerns are shared by others and are being accepted by you as constructive coaching (not criticism).
-
-
Thanks for your comment. Regarding the first observation, this is perhaps just an organizational issue. Section 200 is the broad area where the competancies are to be defined. Since Phase 1 only addresses entry level massage therapists, section 210 describes those. Work beyond the entry level competencies would be added in further sections. Also, in spelling out these competencies, we were directed to do this in terms of Knowledge, Skills and Abilities (KSAs) which some people may not be used to. We have received a lot of comments on section 210 - some people think it is too much for an entry level, some say top schools are already teaching all of the items. We are interested in hearing more opinions.
Regarding the second comments, we have also heard a number of comments about this, and in general we agree with you - while you cant put 8 experts in a room for a year and not expect them to have recommendations, we agree that such a report should be separate from the MTBOK itself. What will remain is KSAs relating to Research Literacy which the task force feels is vital in order for the profession to be able to keep up with changes that impact them.
A couple of other observations. I'm a little embarrassed to note that the curriculum that is recommended is no longer offered by the Massage Therapy Foundation (MTF), so the recommendation cant really be followed anyway. In the meantime, the MTF is now conducting a program where a research literacy program is being taken to schools directly. We will watch this and hope for its success, but just focus on the KSAs that we feel are vital to the profession.
Finally, although Im tremendously proud of the effort thus far - the task force who are volunteers each have at least one full time job in addition to this work - it is only the first of two drafts. The task force pushed to get this draft out in just about 2 months so that you, (the profession) would have at least 2 good opportunities to review and comment on the work, and we would have time to make any changes necessary before a final document is put into place in May of 2010. Also, there will be no imposing of anything as a result of this document even in final unless the organizations with authority in those areas decide to do so. The MTBOK will have not authority in itself. Over time, we hope that the profession recognizes that it is a single, integrated, authoritative, and evolving representation of the full body of knowledge, and it will be used as a source throughout the profession related domains.
So... thanks for the comments... check out section 210.... sorry about the recommendation thing ... and we would love to hear more - we want this to work.
-
-
Chip: While I shall provide specific comments/suggestions via the "automated form" as requested in the draft, I think the following is worth opening for comment in this more public setting.
1. Section 200 (p14) is blank/empty despite the fact that in Section 0, line 140 suggests that this is where on can find the specific "competencies an entry level Massage Therapist must possess.", while all the other sections are said to relate to the "full Massage Therapy field" (lines 139 & 140).
I wonder if anyone else is concerned by total failure to spell out entry level minimum requirements?
2. Appendix B, lines 1562 -1565 recommends that "the Massage Therapy Research Foundation Research Curriculum Kit be implemented within the next three years in every massage school in the United States. We are no longer at the stage of whether it should be done but when it will be done."
I wonder if anyone else it troubled by this recommendation that is appear could be imposed on entry level classes/programs?
-
Comment by Darcy Neibaur on September 24, 2009 at 11:33pm
-
Thank you Chip, so much for the further explanation of the draft MTBOK. It makes understanding the draft a lot easier. The work you all are doing is a great task and undertaking. Thank you so much for serving us all.
© 2024 Created by ABMP.
Powered by
You need to be a member of massage and bodywork professionals to add comments!
Join massage and bodywork professionals