美国物理治疗师教育项目录取的优点和公平性:教师习惯的定性分析。

Journal, physical therapy education Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-07 DOI:10.1097/JTE.0000000000000338
Matthew A Nuciforo
{"title":"美国物理治疗师教育项目录取的优点和公平性:教师习惯的定性分析。","authors":"Matthew A Nuciforo","doi":"10.1097/JTE.0000000000000338","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In contrast to the increased diversity of the US population, historically excluded racial and ethnic groups remain underrepresented in the physical therapist profession. As decision-makers, faculty exert direct influence on enrollment through evaluating applications and determining which applicants are deserving of admission to physical therapist programs.</p><p><strong>Review of literature: </strong>Faculty decision-making in admissions is a cultural process which can reproduce inequities and perpetuate underrepresentation if faculty fail to recognize systemic disparities in legitimized forms of merit. No studies within physical therapist education have directly investigated faculty habitus and patterns of thought and behavior which reinforce admissions decision-making. The purpose of this study was to describe patterns of faculty habitus which influence judgments of admission merit and equity in US physical therapist education programs.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Sixteen physical therapy faculty across 3 physical therapist education programs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using interpretative research methodology and a constructivist approach, semistructured interviews were conducted with each participant. Faculty social actions were also observed during field observations. Thematic analysis using Bourdieu's social reproduction theory was used for coding and establishment of themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two predominant patterns of faculty habitus with corresponding themes emerged from the data: Transformative habitus oriented faculty toward a sense of responsibility to promote equity, construct a more contextualized understanding of merit, and formulate compelling applicant storylines; gatekeeping habitus positioned faculty to support a meritocratic process, reinforce traditional notions of academic rigor, and support the necessity of adjusting standards to address underrepresentation.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusion: </strong>Findings revealed contrasting patterns of faculty habitus which legitimized certain criteria, knowledge, and experiences on which decisions of merit were based. Attention to the individual dispositions of faculty decision-makers in addition to criteria and processes used in holistic review may shape equitable access to physical therapist education programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":517432,"journal":{"name":"Journal, physical therapy education","volume":"38 4","pages":"285-292"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On Merit and Equity in Admission to US Physical Therapist Education Programs: A Qualitative Analysis of Faculty Habitus.\",\"authors\":\"Matthew A Nuciforo\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JTE.0000000000000338\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In contrast to the increased diversity of the US population, historically excluded racial and ethnic groups remain underrepresented in the physical therapist profession. As decision-makers, faculty exert direct influence on enrollment through evaluating applications and determining which applicants are deserving of admission to physical therapist programs.</p><p><strong>Review of literature: </strong>Faculty decision-making in admissions is a cultural process which can reproduce inequities and perpetuate underrepresentation if faculty fail to recognize systemic disparities in legitimized forms of merit. No studies within physical therapist education have directly investigated faculty habitus and patterns of thought and behavior which reinforce admissions decision-making. The purpose of this study was to describe patterns of faculty habitus which influence judgments of admission merit and equity in US physical therapist education programs.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Sixteen physical therapy faculty across 3 physical therapist education programs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using interpretative research methodology and a constructivist approach, semistructured interviews were conducted with each participant. Faculty social actions were also observed during field observations. Thematic analysis using Bourdieu's social reproduction theory was used for coding and establishment of themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two predominant patterns of faculty habitus with corresponding themes emerged from the data: Transformative habitus oriented faculty toward a sense of responsibility to promote equity, construct a more contextualized understanding of merit, and formulate compelling applicant storylines; gatekeeping habitus positioned faculty to support a meritocratic process, reinforce traditional notions of academic rigor, and support the necessity of adjusting standards to address underrepresentation.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusion: </strong>Findings revealed contrasting patterns of faculty habitus which legitimized certain criteria, knowledge, and experiences on which decisions of merit were based. Attention to the individual dispositions of faculty decision-makers in addition to criteria and processes used in holistic review may shape equitable access to physical therapist education programs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":517432,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal, physical therapy education\",\"volume\":\"38 4\",\"pages\":\"285-292\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal, physical therapy education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JTE.0000000000000338\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal, physical therapy education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JTE.0000000000000338","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:与美国人口多样性的增加相反,历史上被排斥的种族和民族群体在物理治疗师职业中的代表性仍然不足。作为决策者,教师通过评估申请和确定哪些申请人值得进入物理治疗师项目,对招生施加直接影响。文献综述:如果教师未能认识到合法形式的功绩的系统性差异,那么教师在招生中的决策是一个文化过程,可能会再现不平等并使代表性不足持续下去。在物理治疗师教育中,没有研究直接调查教师的习惯、思维模式和行为模式,这些都加强了招生决策。本研究的目的是描述影响美国物理治疗师教育项目录取优点和公平性判断的教师习惯模式。主题:16名物理治疗教师横跨3个物理治疗师教育项目。方法:采用解释性研究方法和建构主义研究方法,对每位参与者进行半结构化访谈。在实地观察期间,还观察了教师的社会行为。运用布迪厄的社会再生产理论进行主题分析,对主题进行编码和建构。结果:两种主要的教师习惯模式和相应的主题从数据中显现出来:转型习惯使教师具有促进公平的责任感,构建对优点的更情境化的理解,并制定引人注目的申请人故事情节;守门人的习惯使教职员工支持精英管理的过程,强化传统的学术严谨性观念,并支持调整标准以解决代表性不足的必要性。讨论和结论:研究结果揭示了教师习惯的对比模式,这些模式使某些标准、知识和经验合法化,这些标准、知识和经验是择优决策的基础。除了在整体评估中使用的标准和过程之外,对教师决策者的个人倾向的关注可能会影响物理治疗师教育计划的公平获取。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On Merit and Equity in Admission to US Physical Therapist Education Programs: A Qualitative Analysis of Faculty Habitus.

Introduction: In contrast to the increased diversity of the US population, historically excluded racial and ethnic groups remain underrepresented in the physical therapist profession. As decision-makers, faculty exert direct influence on enrollment through evaluating applications and determining which applicants are deserving of admission to physical therapist programs.

Review of literature: Faculty decision-making in admissions is a cultural process which can reproduce inequities and perpetuate underrepresentation if faculty fail to recognize systemic disparities in legitimized forms of merit. No studies within physical therapist education have directly investigated faculty habitus and patterns of thought and behavior which reinforce admissions decision-making. The purpose of this study was to describe patterns of faculty habitus which influence judgments of admission merit and equity in US physical therapist education programs.

Subjects: Sixteen physical therapy faculty across 3 physical therapist education programs.

Methods: Using interpretative research methodology and a constructivist approach, semistructured interviews were conducted with each participant. Faculty social actions were also observed during field observations. Thematic analysis using Bourdieu's social reproduction theory was used for coding and establishment of themes.

Results: Two predominant patterns of faculty habitus with corresponding themes emerged from the data: Transformative habitus oriented faculty toward a sense of responsibility to promote equity, construct a more contextualized understanding of merit, and formulate compelling applicant storylines; gatekeeping habitus positioned faculty to support a meritocratic process, reinforce traditional notions of academic rigor, and support the necessity of adjusting standards to address underrepresentation.

Discussion and conclusion: Findings revealed contrasting patterns of faculty habitus which legitimized certain criteria, knowledge, and experiences on which decisions of merit were based. Attention to the individual dispositions of faculty decision-makers in addition to criteria and processes used in holistic review may shape equitable access to physical therapist education programs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信