In the CATA’s May newsletter, changes about CEU attribution were shared to the members.
Important CEU Changes within CATA
When the decisions do not match the intent
In the CATA’s May newsletter, changes about CEU attribution were shared to the members. Amongst these changes, the CATA voted to abolish CEUs for participation within a non-CATA board or committee and for non-CATA meetings, which thus targets provincial associations.
According to the CATA, « [t]hese revisions will ensure that members are properly rewarded for their time, while also promoting continued learning and growth as a Certified Athletic Therapist ». When reading this statement, I cannot stop questioning the logic of it all. How is sitting on a provincial board not « promoting continued learning and growth » of both the professional and the profession? Considering that provincial associations and the CATA are working on different fronts, should the time and effort provided by athletic therapists at the provincial level not be worthy of some recognition and be seen as beneficial to the profession as well? Especially keeping in mind that, amidst the chaos that we have been through for the past two years, the CATA confirmed to us several times that they would not take over the work for professional recognition in Quebec. This recognition is certainly the most important element achievable for the growth of the profession at this point and yet, the CATA does deem valid rewarding the members working on the matter. This makes no sense to me! I have similar reflections with regards to the work of the committees. The concussion committee, for instance, undertakes an assignment that the CATA does not even focus on. If CATA’s directors really had the best interest of athletic therapists at heart, they would recognize work such as the one accomplished by our experts when they are producing the Concussion Guidelines (a document that has been recognized in the past by the government of Quebec). However, when one is reading the CATA’s update, awarding CEUs for this kind of initiative would not be « properly reward[ing] their time, while also promoting continued learning and growth as a Certified Athletic Therapist ». Can someone explain their rational to me?
Provincial associations set aside; what about the work achieved by athletic therapists sitting on expert committees outside of the CATA? Do they not deserve being rewarded for their time and involvement? I have in mind a few examples of times where athletic therapists were invited to sit on governmental initiatives or national projects. The presence of these individuals in these settings contribute to the notoriety and reach of our profession. Am I wrong? Do you not think their work would deserve a few CEUs at the least? How are these initiatives less valuable to the growth of a professional than a weekend long course? In my opinion, sitting on a committee of experts is a greater opportunity for growth for a professional. According to the CATA’s rational however, an athletic therapist signing up for any course deserves more « reward ». It is, to me, totally illogical when looking at the objective behind continuing education. Given that our professionals contribute a lot of their time to their work, I would be more than happy to see the extra time they attribute to being involved on a governmental committee, for example, being recognized at least as much as the extra time they put following an extracurricular course.
For the past 2 years, the CATA has constantly been taking decisions that seem detrimental to the growth of our profession. This new politic confirms their total lack of understanding of the real challenges that athletic therapists face. The directors mention that they are willing to work with provincial association, yet they do not deem valuable to reward the individuals volunteering for said associations. Their self-centeredness is not new to me, but it feels like they are not even trying to disguise it anymore, which makes their actions even more questionable. Maybe their motives are financial, as they are looking to increase their revenue from course accreditation? Maybe all they really want is total control over the profession? From my standpoint, I am still waiting for answers.
If, just like me, you think that the CATA’s most recent decision is going against the growth of the profession, I encourage you to come forward as well and send them an email and let them know your opinion. The CTSQ is sharing here a pre-written message that you can use and modify as you like. We recommend that you all keep a close look at the CATA’s developments and to keep questioning the rationale behind their actions. It is your duty as a member to assist in keeping your association on track.
Eric Grenier-Denis
A worried AT