1 / 18

P. Wilkosz, B. Kuczerowska, P. Owczarczak, P. Rąglewska ,

Scientific Society of Physiotherapy at the University School of Physical Education in Poznań AN ATTEMPT TO EVALUATE STUDENTS’ PREPARATION FOR PHYSIOTHERAPIST PROFESSION. P. Wilkosz, B. Kuczerowska, P. Owczarczak, P. Rąglewska , N. Jachimowicz – Markiewicz, P.Korman, D. Łochyński, S. Kowalik.

alissa
Download Presentation

P. Wilkosz, B. Kuczerowska, P. Owczarczak, P. Rąglewska ,

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Scientific Society of Physiotherapy at the University School of Physical Education in PoznańAN ATTEMPT TO EVALUATE STUDENTS’ PREPARATION FOR PHYSIOTHERAPIST PROFESSION. P. Wilkosz, B. Kuczerowska, P. Owczarczak, P. Rąglewska, N. Jachimowicz – Markiewicz, P.Korman,D. Łochyński, S. Kowalik

  2. Degree of student’ preparatia for physiotherapistprofession was evaluated. Students of physiotherapy at the University School of Physical Education (USPE) and students of Health Science Faculty at the University of Medical Sciences (UMS) in Poznań took part in the research.

  3. Three notions were included in the research:I. How do students appreciate the usefulness of the subjects lectured during the studies, for their future profession ?II. How do students evaluate their own preparation for working with retarded people ?III. To what degree do students feel the need to develop their professional knowledge ?

  4. AIM:Collecting students’ opinion about their preparation for the profession.METHOD:80 questionnaires. Questions were divided into 3 subcategories.Answers to most of the questions were put on 0 to 100 scale, in decimal system. One question was open to students’ opinion.

  5. MATERIAL: IV year students. University of Medical Sciences (UMS) Poznań, 31 students(24 women, 7 men).University School of Physical Education Poznań (USPE), 49 students (36 women, 13 men).

  6. The results of the questionnaires are presented below. Legend: *p < 0,05 (Student’s Test ) T – theoretical knowledge P – practical knowledge

  7. Subcategory IStudents opinion about the usefulness of the subjects lectured during their studies in their future profession was presented on the percentage scale.

  8. Students opinion about the usefulness of the subjects lectured during their studies in their future profession was presented on the percentage scale.

  9. Results:1. Students of University of Medical Sciences and University School of Physical Education declare similar level of practical and theoretical preparation for kinezytherapy exercises, wich is 60%.2. The difference in theoretical preparation for modalities treatment between UMS and USPE is 15% (61% for UMS, 76% for USPE), while practical preparation is 67% for UMS and 62% for USPE, which gives the difference of 5%.

  10. 3. Students of UMS evaluate didactic aids during practical classes higher than students of the USPE – the difference is 20%, 63% for UMS and 43% for USPE.4. Sport and Psychology classes were evaluated on the similar level by students of both Universities – the mean value was 81%.5. The ability to diagnose the patient without doctor’s help were evaluated on the similar level by students of both Universities – the mean value was 40% .

  11. Subjects which are not usefull for physiotherapist profession:- University of Medical Sciences – 67% ecology, 61% philosophy, 35% metodology of scientific research.- University School of Physical Education – 45% metodology of scientific research, 35% sociology, 33% theory of physical education.

  12. Subcategory IIEvaluation of preparation for working with people of various types of disabilities.

  13. Evaluation of preparation for working with people of various types of disabilities.

  14. Evaluation of preparation for working with people of various types of disabilities.

  15. Results:1. The difference in preparation for working with people in both groups of students was 21% (65% for UMS and 44% for USPE).2. The difference in theoretical preparation for working with retarded people both children and adults (mentally and physically retarded) was 6%, (55% for UMS and 49% for USPE).3. The difference in practical preparation for working with retarded people both children and adults (mentally and physically retarded) was 9%, (55% for UMS and 46% for USPE).4. The greatest difference in students’ preparation for working with retarded people was observed in gynaecology, it was 60%, (66% for UMS and 6% for USPE).

  16. Subcategory IIIThe value of students’ opinion for developing the professional knowledge.

  17. Results:1. Students of both Universities displayed the need to develop their practical and theoretical knowledge in fields such as: physical medicine, kinezytherapy, diagnosis, psychotherapy. Mean value was 37%.2. Both Universities respondents declare the need to develop their professional knowledge by studying literature, post-graduate studies, trainings and courses. Students of the USPE displayed greater eagerness to study abroad – the difference was 10% (USPE students 35%, UMS students 25%).

  18. Thank you for your attention. www.fizjoterapia.hejhej.net

More Related