ACOTE has requested their own website and are investigating options.

 

 

If AOTA and ACOTE truly are legally separate entities, why doesn’t ACOTE have its own website instead of being part of the AOTA website under “Accreditation?”  CAATE, CAPTE, ACEN & CCNE (nursing has more than one) all have separate sites.  ASHA & CAA are like AOTA & ACOTE and their status is quite complex in some states where graduation from a CAA- accredited program and obtaining the  CCC-SLP is not required (e.g., in NY to work in the school system as a “speech therapist” one needs to have teacher certification and not a license as an SLP).

 

 

 

Hello all,

 

This email from ACOTE is of grave concern to me and I believe also to our profession.  The sitting President of AOTA approached the ACOTE Council and expressed disagreement with a decision the Council made related to the OTD mandate.  The crux of this disagreement rests with AOTA questioning whether ACOTE can set degree requirements as part of their accrediting function.  As outlined in this correspondence from ACOTE, decisions related to degree requirements have been considered the purview of ACOTE for 20 years and have not only gone unquestioned by AOTA but have in fact been applauded.  I am hard pressed to believe that when push comes to shove any outside person/entity would not say there is more than substantial precedent and evidence that AOTA recognizes these decisions to be a part of ACOTE’s accrediting function. 

 

What is not debatable in this conversation is that it is clear from the correspondence we are seeing that AOTA and ACOTE are disagreeing on this point and ACOTE views AOTA’s involvement as improper.  We are headed toward legal action and USDE involvement into this matter.  Worst case scenario ACOTE loses its USDE recognition and we no longer have professional accreditation.  Best case scenario this will be a costly process without any tangible benefit----costly directly in the legal costs associated with both AOTA and ACOTE legal fees and also indirectly in the changes in public perception of our profession. 

 

The only potential outcome is to maintain two points of entry.  Changes in bylaws, in the MOU, fighting in the legal arena…..if any of that is somehow successful in this outcome ACOTE has and will always maintain the ability to set standards and accredit programs.  They can indirectly phase out OTM regardless.  This will not be resolved quickly and ACOTE has clearly indicated they are not changing their mind.  Programs can’t afford to not abide by the mandate and will transition regardless of what legal infighting will occur in the interim.  In my assessment, our profession is headed toward a futile showdown with ourselves without any potential benefit.  There is nothing positive that will come from this action being taken by the AOTA Board.  I know there are mixed feelings among our group related to the OTD mandate, but this action will not do anything to change the ultimate outcome and will only serve to weaken us all as a profession.

 

We have pretty solid precedent that infighting within our profession has not served as well in the past.  We should be working together to prevent it now before we spend the majority of the next two decades trying to overcome the consequences of it for yet another time.

 

Best wishes all,

Tim

 

Timothy J. Wolf, OTD, PhD, OTR/L, FAOTA

Associate Professor and Chair

Department of Occupational Therapy

University of Missouri

810 Clark Hall

Columbia, MO 65211

573-882-8403

wolftj@health.missouri.edu

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From: ot-pd@aotalists.org [mailto:ot-pd@aotalists.org]
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 9:18 PM
To: ot-pd@aotalists.org
Subject: [OT-PD List - AOTA] - ACOTE Update on Entry Level Education