massage and bodywork professionals
a community of practitioners
Why the "requirement" for CEUs?
So i'm getting into my last year where I will need to start looking into some CEUs so I can maintain both my license and certification. and it got me thinking.
WHY?
If my practice the way it currently stands, satisfies my goals as well as satisfies my clients, why then should I have to be forced to take more classes? It seems to me that extra classes should be because we WANT to take something new to add to our toolbox and not because we HAVE to in order to maintain the license we got with what we had when we got it. It particularly bothers me because I know several LMTs, including myself, that struggle right now financially and so having to take more classes becomes a difficult thing to budget.
What's the justification in requiring CEUs? Our licenses and certifications were given based on what we had at that time. Anything on top of that is just new material and not part of the testing that gives us these designations. Seems to me it's, once again, just a money making thing for both state and organizations.
Don't get me wrong. I think taking new classes to learn new things should always be something we do as LMTs to further our practice. but it should be an individual decision on an individual time frame and not a state or organizations.
WHY?
If my practice the way it currently stands, satisfies my goals as well as satisfies my clients, why then should I have to be forced to take more classes? It seems to me that extra classes should be because we WANT to take something new to add to our toolbox and not because we HAVE to in order to maintain the license we got with what we had when we got it. It particularly bothers me because I know several LMTs, including myself, that struggle right now financially and so having to take more classes becomes a difficult thing to budget.
What's the justification in requiring CEUs? Our licenses and certifications were given based on what we had at that time. Anything on top of that is just new material and not part of the testing that gives us these designations. Seems to me it's, once again, just a money making thing for both state and organizations.
Don't get me wrong. I think taking new classes to learn new things should always be something we do as LMTs to further our practice. but it should be an individual decision on an individual time frame and not a state or organizations.
Views: 100
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Jason Erickson on
-
I think part of the reason is that it's always easier to NOT get additional training. I know MTs that have practiced for years, never taken CE courses, who have based their practices on outdated (and often completely wrong) concepts of anatomy, physiology, pathology, etc. Some of them believe massage will spread cancer, that sports massage increases circulation to "flush lactic acid", that clients should drink loads of water to "detox" after massage, that pregnancy tables are essential for expectant moms, and other myths. They spread this (and other) misinformation to their clients, potentially doing harm and perpetuating nonsense that up-to-date MTs have long abandoned.
Without some basic CE requirements, many MTs (of my acquaintance) would never seek to gain knowledge beyond the ABCs of their massage schooling. What they forget is that school training is an entry-level MINIMUM... not the "good enough" expertise they want it to be.
If we want our profession to be taken seriously, we must be willing to accept the responsibility of obtaining ongoing education to improve our depth and breadth of knowledge so that our clients may benefit. There are tons of CE courses to choose from, so it's not like you can't find something interesting and relevant to your practice to study. The science and wisdom of our craft is always advancing, and the mandated time periods are intended to make sure you don't fall too far behind.
-
Permalink Reply by Choice Kinchen on
-
I agree with Jason that too many therapists are satisfied with what they learn(ed) in school. This is why the myths he talked about (flushing of lactic acid, etc) are passed on in the way they are...which is a pet peeve of mine by the way. And I agree that there are tons of CE courses to choose from.
But, I also have to agree with Lisa in that the cost of some of the best (and sometimes most relevant) courses are way too expensive for someone on a tight budget. With my medical bills and the economy the way it is (at least in my area) I can't afford to pay hundreds of dollars for classes that I want to take. The affordable ones always seem to be on subjects that I either have no interest in or are not relevant to my practice. I have lots of books and papers on our profession...and I'm constantly reading and watching videos, but I get no credit for that. I think that should be changed. I actually learn better on my own even though I do like hands on instruction too.
I would like to know how the arbitrary number of CE hours is chosen. One organization says 40 hours and one says 48 hours.
-
Permalink Reply by Kathy Mackay on
-
There should be some common sense involved in the CEU requirements.
My state requires 24 CEU's in a two year time period which IMHO is overkill to keep a state license up to date. Add to that the recent changes in my state which now require half of the CEU's be "hands on". While I agree this sounds ideal it makes finding good local cost effective CEU providers more difficult to find since not all CEU's are created equally. Additionally, hands on courses are ultimately more expensive.
Unless a bodyworker lives in a state that offers incredible continuing education opportunities bodyworkers are put in an untenable position to take whatever is available locally just to satisfy a CEU requirement which I see as a waste of money as well as time OR they must go out of state requiring more money due to incurring travel expenses as well as the CEU seminar.
While I don't disagree with Jason about some MT's needing current info I don't think the current CEU requirements ensure these folks in particular are getting new information. In order for that to happen the state boards would have to insist on specific courses as biannual required CEU's.
A requirement of 12 CEU's biannually which consist specifically of general health information, communicable diseases and ethics should satisfy a state license. These should be easy to take, inexpensive and should be readily available as an online course via the state board website. The seeking of further knowledge and techniques as well as the time frame with which to do so should be left to the bodyworker. As it is currently being done bodyworkers are being forced to feed a voracious CEU cottage industry for our profession.
-
Permalink Reply by Marilyn St.John on
-
Choice makes a good point. The relevant classes are usually way out of my budget, so I spend lots of time studying on my own for which there is no credit nor certification opportunity (usually.)
-
Permalink Reply by Lisa on
-
While I don't disagree that many older MTs could potentially have less than updated info to stop the misinformation being spread...isn't that really the fault of the schooling? should we not all expect to come out of school with equal amount of updated information so as to have a decent practice with just that?
the current CEU system doesn't require specific classes other than an updated ethics class...which in my opinion should just be common knowledge not a required class. instead, one can fill up their requirements with things like aromatherapy and hot stones...none of which actually keep the MT updated in the basic changes of philosophy in anatomy, pathology, etc. And although they are great to have as additional tools, they are not typically necessary to perform a good massage for our clients.
in addition, with my schooling having been 720 hours compared to my fellow LMTs here in TX only having 300 - 500, shouldn't that "buy me some time" to maintain my education level? to me the CEU system doesn't work other than to put money in the pockets of the state, our organizations and those that are offering the CEUs.
-
-
Hi Lisa -
You have raised some good questions, and I have thought about them for a bit before choosing to respond. Please read my comments/responses below as being neutral-toned. My primary goal is to give you some food for thought in return.
If one MT has been out of school for 10 years, another for 5 years, and another for 1-1/2 years, how can we fault their schools for their knowledge of updated information? MTs that have been out for a while are (in general) more at risk for not having the benefit of updated knowledge unless they have kept up on relevant changes through CE hours and relevant reading of recent research-based materials. Further, it is unrealistic to assume that all schools/instructors will be equally adept at incorporating the most recent relevant research. Research literacy is greatly lacking in the field of massage therapy, but some CE providers and organizations such as the Massage Therapy Foundation are working hard to correct this. Until we have enough instructors and schools well-versed enough to teach critical thinking and research literacy courses as core components of massage therapy programs, many schools will continue to lag behind in this important aspect of curriculum development.
I think you make a great point about what topics should be required for CE hours. Ethics is certainly a core competency, but so are anatomy, physiology, pathology, etc. Do you think we should see a change towards increasing the number of required CE hours in these areas?
I have seen the "700+ hours" vs "300 or less hours" argument before. It assumes that the 700+ hour programs provide a greater depth of detailed knowledge ... which most probably do. However, I have also seen 700+ hour programs that provide a bit of this, that, and 20 other things... but no real depth of understanding of any part of the program. Who then decides which programs are 700+ hours of "depth" vs 700+ hours of "skimming"? Where do we draw the line regarding which programs' grads must start their CE requirements first? Do you see the greater difficulty that would create? The simplest solution is to provide a single standard for everyone. Those who come out of school more prepared *should* be more successful than their less-prepared peers... but those folks then have an opportunity to address that disparity through obtaining additional training. Keep up on your CE hours and you will be able to stay ahead of the competition... right? *shrug* <- It's a hypothesis... ;)
All educational systems redistribute money from participants to the state, the educational providers and hosts, and to their employees. Why should CE hours be any different from massage schools in that respect? Are you suggesting that the CE courses available today have nothing of benefit to offer? Or are you simply wishing that the education provided thereby was free? As someone who teaches free workshops for MTs and personal trainers, I can tell you that offering such training for free is costly. It takes a lot more time, effort, and preparation than you might expect, and there are expenses and opportunity costs, such as travel, advertising, printing, and not seeing clients on those days. I enjoy what I do, but I can't afford to do it very often, and I greatly limit participation because I can't pay a TA to help me manage larger groups.
It is my sincere desire to see massage therapy move forward towards improved educational and regulatory standards and expectations. There are many dissenting opinions, but navigating those in respectful dialogue as adults and professional colleagues will help us come together.
:)
Jason
-
-
Hey Jason thanks for the food for thought. and you also bring up good points.
Perhaps to start...an MT that's been out of school for 10 years, 5 years and 1.5 years should all have different requirements in the amount of CEUs per year?
But for argument's sake, the MT that's been out of school for 10 years and has a successful practice, why should she/he be required to take ANY CEUs? If it's a successful practice, doesn't that speak volumes on it's own?
I think that's my basic point. If what we offer to our clients is received well and we are successful to OUR level, why can't that be enough? Isn't that what counts? Obviously if we are injuring clients through negligence due to the lack of education, our practice wouldn't be successful.
I definitely don't think CEUs should be free. but I would like to see more online courses offered at reasonable prices. Having only been out of school for a couple of years, it's a financial burden to try and squeeze in CEUs now when my practice is no way near thriving.
-
Permalink Reply by Julie Onofrio on
-
Yes that would be a really good question. I wonder if we could find out in the history of massage. Usually licensing requirements are created by those who it will serve - like the schools created the 500 hour program so that they could get Pell grants and other financial aid for students.
CE would be so much more effective if people took classes when they wanted. I have a friend in Japan where massage is a 4 year program without any CE requirements and they are hungry for more CE classes so go figure.
You don't have to take ce classes to find out that massage doesn't cause cancer to spread and that the lactic acid theory is controversial. You can do that by reading magazines, websites and journals on massage.
I think it would be something to look into licensing wise and see how/why we have it and how it can be changed. Also some research into the effectiveness of CE classes etc.
I am also creating a new CE guide to help massage therapists find the best classes that will help them the most for whatever stage they are at. Many just take classes to fill the requirement and don't really care what it is -www.massageceguide.com
Julie
© 2024 Created by ABMP.
Powered by
