Context: Accreditation is generally considered the primary mechanism for quality assurance in higher education, but disagreement often exists between accrediting agencies and the perceptions of professionals who feel the accrediting body has failed to meet its quality control function. For accreditation to have value, it must be a meaningful indicator of quality and be viewed as such. Objective: To identify the predominant contributors to quality for postcertification graduate education as perceived by athletic training educators and to compare results among respondents with different education levels, academic ranks, tenure classifications, and program affiliations. Design: Non-experimental descriptive survey. Setting: 2003 National Athletic Trainers' Association Educators' Conference. Patients or Other Participant(s): Of a convenience sample of 353 athletic training educators, 194 (55%) submitted usable questionnaires. Males accounted for 115 (59%) respondents and females for 79 (41%). Of the 14 National Athletic Trainers' Association-accredited postcertification graduate education programs, 12 were represented. Main Outcome Measure(s): Quantitative data for closed-ended questionnaire items were analyzed using descriptive statistics and measures of central tendency, with composite mean scores for each item used for comparisons. Qualitative data were coded according to major themes and analyzed. Results: Support for accreditation at the postcertification graduate education level was moderate (mean = 3.08 ± 0.811 on a 4-point scale). Subjects with doctoral degrees (n = 88) indicated that research contributed significantly more to quality (mean = 3.38 ± 0.636) than did those with master's degrees (n = 106, mean = 2.97 ± 0.786). Respondents with master's degrees stated that clinical education was a greater contributor to quality (mean = 3.76 ± 0.491) than did those with doctoral degrees (3.44 ± 0.663). Conclusions: The educators showed agreement for most quality indicators. The greatest contributors to program quality were program curriculum; adequate faculty, staff, and administrative support; evaluation; clinical education; and research.
© Copyright 2006 Journal of Athletic Training. National Athletic Trainers' Association. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.