Sports Massage Progression

[chandni]

Just counted the all the postcode areas (approx 105 so say 100) and divided it into 11000, so there is 110 GRCCT registrants per area, really?

 

[Andrew Mathew]

What a mess this all is!

 

[SmettereFumare57]

Ditto

 

[HenryVIII]

Not really, CNHC is the only CAM regulator sponsored/funded/endorsed by the government. I don't even think GRCCT is a legal entity, it looks like it's run by a mother and son team who run a school and also heavily influence their professional lead body.

CAM is going through huge changes, the likes of which we have never encountered before, so not only does CNHC have to try to encourage therapists to register, they all have to fight off detractors not only from outside, but also inside the industry. Those that don't want change seem to be the ones with most to lose.

The govt has established that voluntary regs are good for CAM and decided to continue it's funding, which is a good thing IMO.

 

[kLeigh]

8 in mine, 7 in the neigbouring one, 9 in the closest big city to me, 0 in the closest big town to me

 

[Horse]

Agree with most points however note (despite being excellent courses) the "levels" quoted by MC / BTEC were "self awarded and have little to do with the real world ie: outside ISRM and definately not the QCF




which reinforces my point about nationally standardised levels of education, external policing and industry regulation

Jx

 

[Devmini]

I agree, at my school, I have a minimum of 4 visits per year on accreditation/EV visits, this year in January already have had two visits, last year we had additional ones, at our request, and had 8. IMO these visits make the student feel confident that its not just them under scrutiny, we are also.

The problem is, this isnt always happening in all schools.

 

[GlendoraMargretPeggy]

'Unfortunately' there already is supposed to be
However
Nationally standardised levels of education
QCF / WBA / RITS currently do not appear to be enforcing their requirements and have allowed several sub standard / incorrectly mapped qualifications onto the framework (examples and reasons available on request) and the water is now proving extremely muddy for those who wish to follow the rules

External policing
Ofqual appears to have a very 'charitable' approach to the enforcement of QMS requirements.

Industry regulation
Voluntary regulation allows some (again, examples available upon request) to simply ignore it all anyway

Confused ???

"Well, whenever I'm confused, I just check my underwear. It holds the answer to all the important questions." - Abe Simpson


ps
is this a record for the number of abbreviations in one post?

 

[Londron]

Examples would be nice. If voluntary regulation isn't doing what its supposed to be doing then how do we stop these schools from flouting the rules? Is Voluntary Regulation just a 'toothless tiger'?

 

[Alba]

Dan,
policing schools is not the job of the regulator. As an example...you would expect for someone to get HPC registration as a physio that they would undergo a good level of ultrasound training, as that is well within the remit of a physio, and is used by most. Wrong....in one university that I know of they dont like it so they dont teach it. Are you saying that statutory regulators are also toothless tigers?

Policing schools is the role of the education sector....it just so happens that this isnt occurring properly so the lead bodies have had to get involved to protect the regulator, and in turn, (attempt to) protect the public. (If you have opinions on that, please use the CNHC threads so as not to take this too far off topic again)

You know yourself that the course you have been doing doesnt meet anyones standards apart from their own, so what do they do, they work outside of regulation, and then theres no-one at all to slap their wrists.

Whilst it is not the job of the regulator to get involved in a schools standards, should they be informed that 'so & so' school is not delivering to the required standards, then they would not accept an application for registration from one of their graduates.

 

[zlnlqedf]

I refer back to a thread in which I publicly stated that Awarding organisations must shoulder the blame, they award the certificates based on evidence supplied by training providers.
if that training provider is less than honest, or photo copies large volumes of evidence, or allows theory papers to be undertaken in "open book " format.

Then the AO should be spot checking, FE has a minimum of 2 observations for each tutor by external assessors, evidence is sampled at 25=50 % depending on the lenght of time the qualification has been running t the FE college, this is because in private training providers, they access public funds, the AOs unfortunately dont police this enough, they blamer the lack of resources ( staff), but then state to the PAs that they cannot go and check these training centres.

One AO has the qualifications development manager, the qualificartions manager and a leading external verifier running their own schools, all of which fail to meet the minimum educational standards.....who exactly are externally checking these schools?

These have been brought to the attention of the regulator, and wil be discussed at a meeting at the end of the month, I will present evidence which shows recently permitted verifying organisations are flouting their responsibilities, I hope to have the verifiying status revoked or at least suspended until it is investigated and all their registered members audited. Unfortunately the regulator has to wait until these meetings and seek the advice of the PSB members before it can act, as these are the specialist in each case.

There are teething problem,. but they are being addressed.

bg

 

[~He calls me MOMMY~]

I've just got around to reading the January issue of Sportex. In amongst the interesting, not so interesting and frankly rubbish articles were a couple of quotes I thought I'd share. I recommend anybody interested in regulations, CNHC etc. etc. to have a read of it.

BASRaT Communications Co-ordinator Michael Nicol;
"It has become clear that statutory regulation of our field has become increasingly unlikely and now largely unworkable due to the high number of poorly qualified professionals now practising in the area."

BASRat are interesting to me as I come from a conditioning background and have generally fitted into the slot between the physios and fitness coaches with the teams I have worked with. Did they try to get rehabilitation regulated?

Bob Bramah, Editor Sportex;
".....there is nothing wrong with being a 'complementary therapist' but if you want to be taken seriously by the medical profession, especially in sport, it is a name you should avoid."

A personal view but interesting given that the SMA is working with the CNHC and this magazine is distributed to their members. Demonstrates the split in our field quite well.

Obviously these are just parts of the articles, so please have a look if you can so I can't be accused of taking things out of context. (And no I don't work for them so don't take this as advertising either.)