Is Direct Supervision in Clinical Education for Athletic Training Students Always Necessary to Enhance Student Learning?

Abstract

Objective: To present an alternative model of supervision within clinical education experiences. Background: Several years ago direct supervision was defined more clearly in the accreditation standards for athletic training education programs (ATEPs). Currently, athletic training students may not gain any clinical experience without their clinical supervisors being physically present so that the supervisors may intervene at any point if necessary. Although we do not disagree with the spirit of this requirement, we present information regarding the changing generation of students and the importance of developing strong professionals who will represent our field in the ever-changing allied health care arena. Clinical Advantages: W e believe student learning may take place without direct supervision and that a system of guided autonomy with meaningful and dynamic reflection may better prepare the student for the future. W e feel that limited aspects of an athletic training student’s clinical experience may not always need direct supervision. If students are performing skills that are not in violation of any professional practice acts, their interest and learning may increase with a guided autonomy model, as opposed to direct supervision. For example, once an athletic training student has mastered skills like taping, stretching, and initiating an emergency action plan, they should be able to effectively and safely perform these aspects without direct supervision. W e suggest that students may continue to learn, and benefit from an educational standpoint, while gaining a limited portion of their experiential learning requirement without direct supervision.