Differing employer and alumni opinions of new graduates’ abilities

  • W. David Carr Missouri State University
  • Jennifer Volberding Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences College of Osteopathic Medicine (OSU-COM)
  • Benjamin Timson Texas Christian University
Keywords: Transition to practice, preparedness, professional socialization

Abstract

Context: Across multiple disciplines, seasoned veterans often state that recent graduates are not ready to practice. Previous work has established a set of soft skills considered lacking in new athletic training (AT) graduates. Objective: To measure the opinions of AT employers and alumni about the recent graduates’ six soft skills (communication, confidence, independence, creativity, humility, and work ethic) and the seven Foundational Behaviors of Professional Practice (FBPP) delineated in the 5th Edition of the AT Education Competencies. Design: Quantitative online survey instrument. Setting: Three clinical work settings (College/University, High School/Clinic, and Emerging Practices). Patients or Other Participants: Snowball sampling through a variety of email strategies yielded 218 employers of recent AT graduates and 376 recently graduated AT alumni. Main Outcome Measure(s): Self-reported opinions of abilities and employers' opinions of recent graduates’ abilities were collected using the alumni opinion survey (AOS) and employer opinion survey (EOS) respectively. Demographics of the groups and ratings on a Likert-like scale (1-10) were captured for the previously identified six soft skills as well and the seven FBPPs. Analysis of variance was conducted to determine differences between employers and recent graduates and within each group. Results: With the exception of two areas of FBPPs (primacy of the patient and advancing knowledge), significant differences were found between employers and recent graduate groups in all of the six soft skills and five FBPPs. Conclusions: Two possible explanations are made by the authors. Recent graduates are accurately rating their abilities while employers are more critical or conversely recent graduates are inflating their abilities while employers are rating them accurately. When looking at the average values from each group, both were well above average suggesting that recent graduates are doing well, perhaps just not as well as employers would prefer.

References

REFERENCES

Codrington G. Detailed introduction to generational theory. Tomorrow Today. 2008;2.

Cordeniz JA. Recruitment, retention, and management of Generation X: A focus on nursing professionals. Journal of Healthcare Management. 2002;47(4):237.

Mazerolle SM, Bowman TG, Klossner JC. An analysis of doctoral students' perceptions of mentorship during their doctoral studies. Athletic Training Education Journal. 2015;10(3):227-235.

Kupperschmidt BR. Understanding generation X employees. Journal of Nursing Administration. 1998;28(12):36-43.

Carr WD, Volberding J. Employer and employee opinions of thematic deficiencies in new athletic training graduates. Athletic Training Education Journal. 2012;7(2):53-59.

Mulholland S, Derdall M. Exploring what employers seek when hiring occupational therapists. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2004;71(4):223-229.

Associates HR. Falling Short? College learning and career success. Washington, DC2015.

Lowry JS, Timms J, Underwood DG. From school to work: Employer perceptions of nursing skills. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development. 2000;16(2):80-85.

Arnold B, Gansneder B, Van Lunen B, Szczerba J, Mattacola C, Perrin D. Importance of selected athletic trainer employment characteristics in collegiate, sports medicine clinic, and high school settings. Journal of Athletic Training. 1998;33(3):254.

Association NAT. Athletic Training Educational Competencies. 5th ed. Dallas, TX2011.

Coll R, Zegwaard K. Perceptions of desirable graduate competencies for science and technology new graduates. Research in Science & Technological Education. 2006;24(1):29-58.

Kahanov L, Andrews L. A survey of athletic training employers' hiring criteria. Journal of Athletic Training. 2001;36(4):408.

Gaedeke RM, Tootelian DH, Schaffer BF. Employers want motivated communicators for entry-level marketing positions: Survey. Marketing News. 1983;17(5):1.

Pitney WA. The professional socialization of certified athletic trainers in high school settings: a grounded theory investigation. Journal of athletic training. 2002;37(3):286.

Mills J, Lennon D, Francis K. Contributing to a culture of learning: a mentor development and support project for Australian rural nurses. International Journal of Nursing Practice. 2007;13(6):393-396.

Mazerolle SM, Walker SE, Thrasher AB. Exploring the transition to practice for the newly credentialed athletic trainer: a programmatic view. Journal of athletic training. 2015;50(10):1042-1053.

Mazerolle SM, Clines S, Eason CM, Pitney WA. Perceptions of support networks during the graduate-assistant athletic trainer experience. Journal of athletic training. 2015;50(12):1256-1266.

Marcinkus Murphy W. Reverse mentoring at work: Fostering crossâ€generational learning and developing millennial leaders. Human Resource Management. 2012;51(4):549-573.

Earle V, Myrick F, Yonge O. Preceptorship in the intergenerational context: an integrative review of the literature. Nurse education today. 2011;31(1):82-87.

Thompson JA. Why work in perioperative nursing? Baby Boomers and Generation Xers tell all. AORN journal. 2007;86(4):564-587.

Newton FB. The new student. About Campus. 2000;5(5):8-15.

Association NAT. Professional Education in Athletic Training 2013.

Greenberger E, Sørensen AB. Toward a concept of psychosocial maturity. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 1974;3(4):329-358.

Phillips C, Kenny A, Esterman A, Smith C. A secondary data analysis examining the needs of graduate nurses in their transition to a new role. Nurse education in practice. 2014;14(2):106-111.

Published
2019-11-08
Section
Athletic Training