Transforming Physiotherapy Education through Innovation and Inclusion

Abstract

In this new era of the 21st century, physiotherapy education is at a turning point and the old-‎fashioned approaches to teaching must be adapted and changed to cater for the dynamic world of ‎modern medicine.  (1,2) In the present fast-changing medical scene, physiotherapists' need to be ‎educated in the future is a necessity that should be addressed. Today, to just learn needs to be ‎supplemented by proactively learning. Simulations, problem-based learning and integrated ‎curriculums are making a difference in pedagogical innovation and transforming the world of ‎education systems. (3) These new approaches to pedagogy not only help develop learners' ‎reasoning and psychomotor abilities, but also allow them to commit themselves to a critical ‎approach and to learning all their lives. Through the use of the Social Ecological Model, educators ‎can engage with individual, inter-personal and institutional learning barriers. Inclusion of DEI at ‎Physiotherapy levels is critical. (4) The health care practitioners need to be well prepared to attend ‎to their clients from varied backgrounds through cultural competence. Implementing DEI in ‎teaching and learning, as well as implementation of evaluation of health care practices can help to ‎eliminate disparities in the delivery of health services. For curriculum change to happen, however, ‎there must be faculty change and institutional (ownership) buy-in. (5)‎

https://doi.org/10.37939/jnah.v4i02.259
PDF

References

‎1.‎ Mocke M, Unger M, Hanekom S. Validation of the World ‎Health Organization ‎Rehabilitation Competency Framework: ‎An illustration using physiotherapy. Clinical ‎Rehabilitation. ‎‎2025;39(1):88-98. doi:10.1177/02692155241300271‎

‎2.‎ Frenk, J., Chen, L., Bhutta, Z. A., Cohen, J., Crisp, N., Evans, ‎T., … Zurayk, H. (2010). ‎Health professionals for a new ‎century: Transforming education to strengthen health ‎systems ‎in an interdependent world. The Lancet, 376(9756), 1923–‎‎1958. ‎https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61854-5 ‎

‎3.‎ Harden, R. M. (2018). Ten key features of the future medical ‎school—Not an impossible ‎dream. Medical Teacher, 40(10), ‎‎1010–1015. ‎https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2018.1498613 ‎‎

‎4.‎ Issenberg, S. B., McGaghie, W. C., Petrusa, E. R., Lee ‎Gordon, D., & Scalese, R. J. (2005). ‎Features and uses of ‎high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: ‎A ‎BEME systematic review. Medical Teacher, 27(1), 10–28. ‎‎https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590500046924 ‎

‎5.‎ Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: ‎An Overview. Theory Into ‎Practice, 41(4), 212–218. ‎https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2‎

‎6.‎ Reeves, S., Fletcher, S., Barr, H., Birch, I., Boet, S., Davies, ‎N., … Kitto, S. (2016). A ‎BEME systematic review of the ‎effects of interprofessional education. Medical Teacher, ‎‎38(7), ‎‎656–668. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2016.1173663 ‎

‎7.‎ Scheckel MM, Nelson KA. An interpretive study of nursing ‎students' experiences of caring ‎for suicidal persons. J Prof ‎Nurs.2014;30(5):426-435 doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2014.03.003 ‎‎

‎8.‎ van der Vleuten, C. P. M., Schuwirth, L. W. T., Driessen, E. ‎W., Govaerts, M. J. B., & ‎Heeneman, S. (2015). Twelve tips ‎for programmatic assessment. Medical Teacher, 37(7), ‎‎641–‎‎646. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.973388 ‎

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Nursing and Allied Health