Process Recap
Click here to download the Powerpoint document shown at this point in the process.
Jay: Please join us in the large group. At this point it makes sense to recap how we got here and then we can share the results of the poll we did last night.
The objective for the Summit is to develop recommendations to the profession on whether the clinical doctorate is appropriate as an entry-level degree, as a post-graduate degree or not at all.
Some research was done looking at other professions and how clinical doctorates came about for them. A survey was done of the profession and over 6000 people have responded so far. There are also 50 to 100 responses on the blog.
Some of the responses were positive but almost universally the message was, "thank you for opening up the conversation."
Wednesday night we started with a short welcome by the presidents of the two sponsoring organizations. We heard a short case study about the nursing doctorate and one about the Army doctorate.
We asked you to develop a timeline and look for the big ideas impacting our work.
We developed scenarios using 14 variables and these were used to explore the implications of possible futures on the profession. We then built a strawman model based on other professions and what they did with a doctorate.
We looked at the continuum of competence and how the entry level doctorate and a post-grad doctorate would impact each of the phases.
One of the teams developed 7 possible scenarios which is the work we did just now. We also had a team look at the problem we are trying to solve.
At the end of the night we asked you to write your recommendations on post-it notes.
We didn't tell you what should be in the recommendations. We discovered some patterns based on this. Some talked about the entry-level degree, some about the post-grad option and a few others felt there should be no doctorate.
Click here to download the Powerpoint document summarizing the results of the post-it notes.
Click here to download the Excel document summarizing the results of the post-it notes.
22 commented on the entry-level degree; 7 recommended no change. 12 people recommended the Masters as the entry level degree. 12 endorsed the masters as the entry level degree.
2 said make the doctorate as the degree by 2020.
32 people talked about the post graduate doctorate. 22 people support the option of the doctorate. 10 people opposed it.
2 people wrote stem cell.
1 person supported the MD/DO bridge.
There were some additional comments as well that didn't fit in these categories. The results are posted on the panels over there. There was a heavy leaning towards supporting the masters as the entry level degree and comments on supporting the option of a post-grad doctorate.
We'd like you to flush out these options.
We're going to ask you to sign up for the group you are interested in working on. Edit the recommendation that's written here; write the justification and then build an action plan. What should be done, who should do something with this? We're going to flush out these options.
There are two options that are interesting. The MD/DO bridge is something that isn't in our control but could we recommend further exploration and an action plan for it. Similarly there is the stem cell option.
We'll look at the list of sign-ups and see where we are at that point. We'll see where the group is so please come up here and sign up.
I'm proud we made a decision. There are still programs that could go in that direction (an entry-level doctorate). I am concerned about a market driven solution. We did that with a masters degree. We ended up with a mish-mash of degrees. I'm worried that just because we don't support this it could happen and we could end up with a whole bunch of doctoral degrees 10 years from now.
There is a possibility of adding an option of no entry level doctorate. Add an additional group.
I don't understand how that is different from the first one.
There is an assumption that a lot of people operate under. There is no statement that the masters is the entry level degree. There has never been a statement made that this is the terminal degree. Somewhere we need to make that statement. It should be a single masters degree - not 10 different degrees.
There is built in respect for the MBA. We have chosen by the market place approach to have 10 different degrees.
If we decide to make a statement that says no doctorate as the entry level degree we need to define what the masters is and how that will be and when that will be.
Would the recommendation be that there would be no entry level clinical doctorate.
There will be some combination statements.
The masters is the terminal degree for the PA - that is an authoritative statement.
The terminal degree is important to confirm regardless of our recommendation. Terminal degrees represent promotion and things like that. The terminal degree is a masters and we can use that where we need to - but that doesn't imply it's an entry level degree.
Our first task is to edit the statement. Do that in your small groups. Editing in a group of 45 is painful.
Come up and grab a pen and put your name where you want to work.
Alright - has anyone not signed up? There was a discussion about the terminal degree status and I don't understand the issues. Can these groups work this out? Do we need a discussion about what a terminal degree is?
We'll leave this for now. No one will work on it in this round. Would anyone else like to work on this first option?
We're going to give you about 90 minutes to work through this. Write out a statement. Flush out the argument in outline form at a minimum. Then do the action plan after that.
It's very tempting to punt and be as specific as possible. Focus and get it on the board.