Full Academic Proposal Review

11 Jul

Full Academic Proposal Review
11 Jul
Assignment Submission: Full Academic Proposal of the UIDAHO DAT Review
Due Date: July 5, 2011 8:00 AM

Type: Work individually
Attached is the Doctor of Athletic Training full academic proposal. The attached proposal marks a historic change in how the original UIDAHO DAT program was contrived. The doctoral students of the cohort DAT were tasked with reviewing the attached document by the DAT program mentors. Some things have already changed as it is a work in progress. (1 page review for this as usual)
Attachments: UI EDU — FP DAT.pdf


The DAT full proposal has documented the potential to improve clinical practice for certified and licensed athletic trainers who want to “achieve the highest degree in their field”(4). The model reflects an opportunity for athletic trainers to enhance patient healthcare outcomes beyond traditional PhD or EdD programs through clinical research specialization occurring at site-specific, mentored clinical residencies. The proposal attained both state and national recognition on April 1, 2011.

The Idaho State Board of Education approved the nation’s first advanced clinical Doctor of Athletic Training post-graduate program. In order for this to happen, the University of Idaho also required Dr. Seegmiller and Dr. Nasypany to mentor selected doctoral students through a self-sustained program. The University of Idaho also continues to support the DAT by encouraging the initial cohort class to create new research, expand upon knowledge, and challenge previous best practices by applying accepted clinical methods. These practices may potentially add to sustaining Carnegie level recognition.

Although the University has embraced the DAT model without reservation, the question remains as to who and how the individual residencies may attain recognition from the professional organization associated with athletic trainers. Being a post-professional program the NATA has current residence requirements that already demonstrate accreditation through non-governmental peer review processes.

The DAT proposal suggests an original perspective can possibly extend or contend with traditional NATA criteria established to ensure quality, accountability, and programmatic improvement. Thus, the question is posed, will the NATA lack of recognition to this new program help or hinder quality standards for the already Certified and Licensed Athletic Trainer? The proposal displays evidence that although NATA accreditation was seen as the “Gold Standard” for athletic trainers seeking NATABOC credentials and licensure, the DAT lack of this recognition actually creates a new breed of healthcare professional.

The proposal allows significant flexibility for the first-year cohort group to establish a baseline measure of creativity in which future professionals can design their own translational research study. This type of clinical application combines scholarly practice with the revised CAATE-accredited standards. The Doctor of Athletic Training model mirrors some close resemblance to specializations seen in traditional medical model fellowships. This distinct innovation, in the genius of design, will most likely create something new the current medical community has never seen.

The program director’s approach at formalizing an established advanced Masters of Athletic Training program further demonstrates a foundation where patient outcomes are linked directly to medical professional practice. To validate this action, the University of Idaho agreed to cease undergraduate athletic training education. This significant shift in athletic training history was evidenced by the formal Doctor of Athletic Training acceptance. The event could parallel the landmark retirement of an AMA allied health affiliation once highly sought after by the NATA in 1989 (1) which in 2006, (2) essentially becomes not good enough. It is these intricate details which set apart the Doctor of Athletic Training program’s bold approach as clearly defined, argued, and supported to focus a new species of medical practitioner.

The DAT student practitioner creates greater primary focus toward enhanced patient-centered outcomes. The DAT also will require distinct levels of specialty care under-utilized or even evidenced in most other medical professional practice programs. The DAT program quality specifically measures: reflect process-oriented curriculum assessments geared at validating proper input / output processes, as well as utilizing the role of faculty and infrastructure to promote student optimal success. The end product keys into filling an extensive needs-based demand.

Some traditional PhD, EdD, and conventional medical professional models often fail to demand both scholarship and clinical based patient-specific outcomes. What actually sets the Doctor of Athletic Training concept light years ahead of others are simple changes which align with National Institutes of Health quality measures. In addition to quality measures, the DAT proposal may create another tremendous ability; its structure to duplicate exponentially among other medical occupations which desire to serve patients centered on enhanced best practice outcomes. Should other health professionals decide to think outside the box (as athletic trainers have done with the DAT,) our nation will no doubt move closer toward enhanced patient-based outcomes as the sole basis for treatment.

There are also emphatic entrepreneurial elements that appear with each entering DAT student the University of Idaho accepts beyond the initial cohort. In 2012, the DAT should expect to facilitate even more diverse avenues of specialized research. The initial cohort class has a unique capability to spawn the growth of a second generation geared toward producing even better critical research due to relevance in clinical practice the original cohort was not obliged to. The reviews simply confirm, Idaho’s “innovative (DAT) program will lead the profession of athletic training and its educational processes upward along a natural evolutionary path.”(3)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: