First,
before I write anything else it is important to state that I am supportive of
the ELAP project. I want it to succeed.
Now here
are some of my observations and concerns:
The initial survey attached to the Federation of State
Massage Boards job task analysis survey was flawed. The only option for general massage was the
term Swedish Massage and for a therapeutic intervention was deep tissue
massage. The problem is:
Swedish Massage as an approach is too limiting and has
current and historical confusion about what it means. I searched state licenses and seldom is the
term Swedish Massage used. Massage Therapy and Therapeutic massage are much
more common. In the state licensing
descriptions of massage application terms such as gliding, kneading, pressing,
shaking and so forth are use almost exclusively instead of effleurage, petrissage
and so forth. If effleurage means “gliding” then use gliding and if petrissage
means “ to knead” then use the term
knead. I strongly believe that is time to use
terminology that explains what is done and qualified by how it is done if for
no other reason than to help researchers be able to standardize protocols. The project is attempting to describe entry
level practice so the simpler the better
Alteration of the ELAP is simply a term replacing process
while leaving the intent of the document in place. Easy to do and clinging to
the historical terminology is not worth the potential problems that can arise and how this language
could undermine the whole project. Please
–the language should be as generic as possible.
As problematic is the inclusion of deep tissue massage. There
is little agreement about what deep tissue massage is and that is a huge issue
for entry level education. I strongly
feel that this section should be eliminated and the general massage platform
include the ability to adapt pressure to address the various tissue layers of
the body.
The method of compression was totally left out and yet it is
the approach that is used in many situations especially over clothing and when
lubricant is limited or not used. This is
a flaw in supporting methods like seated massage or in situation where static
pressure is used.
I propose that entry level should be based more on safe
practice of general nonspecific massage with outcomes of wellness, relaxation,
stress management, and able to address minor manifestations of pain and
mobility in the generally health client.
Content related to professional communication is important
and I believed covered well in the document.
There are aspects of specific methods for communication skill based on
organized systems integrated into the document and I think this should be more
generic. For example- I am skilled in
the used the Myers Briggs system but would never suggest that this approach be
incorporated into the ELAP document.
I also am concerned over content in the ELAP document that
relates to psycho/emotional issues. Topics
such as breath work, emotional release, psycho/social l behavior and energy
balance are too controversial and if and when valid are way outside the realm
of entry level. These topics should be eliminated.
I have some concern over the use of the taxonomy created by
the work group. I think it would have
been better to use a method to create the document that is grounded in current
education and implementation into standard academia may be an issue. This being
said, I believe what the work group did develop is workable. I do think that the curriculum map based on
the taxonomy is too tight and could be perceived as dictatorial. I personally understand the domains and how a
bit of content is addressed in each domain, but as I reviewed the document it
felt like the curriculum map was telling me HOW to teach instead to indicating
WHAT to teach. WHAT AND HOW ARE VERY
DIFFERENT. For example many times it is
stated to use mock forms to analysis something or write a sample massage plan
or role pay and critique peer. These are all fine educational methods but they
are HOW to teach something instead of WHAT to teach. I suggest that the curriculum map stick with
WHAT to cover and if appropriate list methods that are used to teach this type
of content separately. Personally I think the HOW should be more directly
related to teacher training.
Also removing the HOW TO TEACH SOMETHING and concentrating
on WHAT TO TEACH would significantly simplify the document which is overwhelming.
I think the work group attempted to do
too much and suggest that the document be simplified.
This is enough for now. More to come. What do you think? Comment on ELAP: elapmassage.org
Agree whole heartedly with you. Simple English terms apply better than sticking to French from one modality. Simplify for clarity. We often seem to forget this is entry level we are discussing. An inexperienced starting out graduate who wants a job.
ReplyDeleteGreat observation. Make sure to make comments on the ELAP Document
ReplyDeleteWell said. I believe it is important to focus on the content, not the HOW. Many people learn in different ways and by putting in writing the how it is to be taught, may actually lead to many inefficient courses.
ReplyDeleteJeff I agree obviously. However the workgroup needs to hear this directly so make sure you comment on the document. elapmassage.org.
ReplyDeleteI think your willingness to shed the old "Swedish" massage terms in favor of more descriptive ones has great validity, and I will comment on the ELAP to that end. Thank you for pointing it out, because I don't think I would have given it much thought if you had not (I'm so used to all the terms, both old and new).
ReplyDeleteHowever, I don't see a problem with addressing emotional release, since it can easily happen on the table of an entry-level therapist, and in fact I applaud that subject being on the document. I also happen to believe that energy balance is at the root of all homeostasis and of healing, but as I see it as an integral part of all living beings and any kind of hands-on-work. But if you are simply regarding it as a type of 'manipulation technique,' I can see how you might not want "energy balance" to be included in the ELAP. But basically, since psycho/social issues exist and are often expressed or felt during a session, I do see this as entry-level information. Just because we decide not to address it educationally does not mean it won't be a part of an entry-level practitioner's experience, and the more knowledge the new therapist has the better equipped they are to handle a situation professionally.
Just my thoughts about your thoughts. Thanks for the post!
Sandy Grover Mason
Sandy, discussion on these topics is important. I am happy that you are taking the time to comment both here and on the ELAP document. I am putting my observations out there to stimulate conversation. If I were writing the ELAP I would have placed the emotional quality of a client's responses in a section addressing how to adapt to client's responses. The concept of emotional release is controversial as is the topic of energy other that to maintain a compassionate safe environment at entry level I do not think extensive focus is appropriate
ReplyDeleteHi, Sandy--I think you are totally on point with this:
ReplyDelete"other that to maintain a compassionate safe environment at entry level I do not think extensive focus is appropriate"
An average of 500 hours of training at a vo-tech level simply doesn't give us enough to be practicing safely (for the client) in these deep waters.
That's not a personal insult to MTs; it's simply a fact of the system.
Your observation is correct, as is your criticism of the ELAP's assigning this to entry-level.
I respect you a lot, and I want to support you in getting this important feedback where they will see it, but dear Buddha, did they make that process unnecessarily difficult.
But you are right, and it is crucially important to our future, so as painful as it's going to be, I will see it through.
(--Ravensara Travillian, in case the profile process doesn't make that clear)