CAPTE (the organization that accredits entry-level PT programs) require ALL PT faculty participate in 'scholarly activity.' This is probably not terribly fair, especially for the schools that hire faculty without a terminal research degree (i.e., PhD). The colleaguesI work with at my school with an EdD really struggles with research, and the very few with a DPT are really unable to have an independent research agenda. Why would they really since DPT programs do not teach nearly enough research for them to do anything independently. CAPTE recognizes this somewhat and school requirements for CAPTE are for the entire faculty and not foe each member. But all must have a scholarly agenda....and dissemination is required for that.
I'm admit I'm still a student, and do not see everything that that the faculty do. I will agree with you to a great extent. I do get view of the faculty dynamic from what I encounter a student within my own program.
So yes, those faculty with a PhD may likely less equipped via formal background to perform independent scientific research. This does not mean meaningful within the PT world is out of grasp for these faculty. Not all meaningful research must be scientific. Nor does it mean a learning curve cannot be overcome for those without the strict science research background a PhD may bring to the table. The going may be harder, yes, but one still can learn and grow as faculty if the setting fosters such environment.
Also, I'd argue not all DPT programs impart a research foundation as well as others may do on the students too. As well, some may stress more clinical emphasis, and/or cut down research process exposure for their students. This may be seen as shortened program length (condensed time for the DPT).
The CAPTE body seems moreso as a body that sets minimum (high) standards for accreditation on fundamental educational pillars to allow PT programs to exist that are accredited today. Looking at the good amount of variability from program to program in the small details will show that they're not all focused equally.
Now as to whether the DPT should mandate greater research exposure for its students simply to practice as a PT is for another thread. Even though I've entered a path of high research exposure during my 3 year run, I sometimes wonder if this aspect is over-emphasized by PT academe and the APTA agenda. Where does the costs of these ideals pushed onto the students reach a breaking point of cost-opportunity?
Remember, this profession required a rigorous masters not too many years ago as it's barrier to entry. I believe objective criticism of the "DPT agenda" should still be healthfully critiqued.
The DPT may be here to stay (like it or not), but its true weight in the eyes in the real world still remains suspect. Until the DPT makes a lick of difference in the eyes of potential employers and new-grad employability, the DPT remains an agenda by the powers that be... It will likely be so for a few more decades as the PT profession goes through its "growing pains" in the years to come.
It will be interesting to reflect back on this once I've graduated and had more interactions with those therapists who've been practicing for many years already.
