Massage Sellouts, A response to the Ralph Stephens Article
The May issue of Massage Today contains an article written by
massage therapist and distance education product promoter Ralph
Stephens attacking the Career College Association and distance
education and in support of policies put in place by the American
Massage Therapy Association (AMTA) and the National Certification
Board for Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork (NCBTMB) that prohibit
massage students from access to distance education, and career
colleges with massage programs from offering distance education to
this student population.
The reason that the AMTA and the NCBTMB are against distance
education and career colleges teaching massage is because the AMTA
makes money from book sales to its 400 schools and members. Career
Colleges do not need to buy books from the AMTA and they often have
no affiliation with any association. In addition, the NCBTMB makes
money certifying CEU providers for certification and licensure,
much of this via online CEUs. These organizations also market and
profit from sales of distance education programs.
Massage schools and teachers tend to direct their students into the
massage association that they are aligned with. The association
that controls the schools controls the industry.
The career colleges often have no allegiance to any of the massage
organizations and over time as they increasingly enter the massage
education field they will erode the market for these organizations
and shift the balance of power and control toward new directions.
Career colleges and vocational schools are far more sophisticated
than the small mom and pop strip mall based massage schools so
easily controlled and manipulated by the massage organizations and
associations. These organizations are just realizing that those
days are ending and that the changes are already in motion.
Of course they could develop a plan to adapt to the changes in the
market, but these organizations are controlled and/or strongly
influenced by a hand full of postsecondary massage school owners
who do not want to see career colleges take over the industry and
are frightened by the changes that are occurring very rapidly in
the massage market, so rather than adapt, they will fight. We
predict that this will be a losing battle, the traditional massage
schools will either adapt, close up, or be sold off to the larger
schools, but change will happen. The smart money would be on the
massage organizations that secretly begin to court the large career
college corporations. (They might as well join the winning team
early in the game)
The strategy of these organizations to control the industry has
been and will be state legislation. This is the battlefield.
Their solders are their members and state chapter officers who lead
the fight for state regulation and for language in state massage
bills that supports their association interests.
The major leaders in the massage industry are largely controlled by
the AMTA, ABMP, NCBMTB, the massage magazines (largely owned and/or
influenced by the massage associations, and the massage products
manufacturing and sales industry. This control is based upon
financial incentives. If you go along with the “program” a
massage leader will be given cash stipends by the associations, be
invited to speak at conferences (all expenses paid), be published
in the massage magazines, and generally be provided with money and
recognition. The better liked you are the better you are treated.
These leaders will fight over who gets the best seat on the bus,
or the largest hotel suite. Most of these massage leaders also
sell distance education products that they have developed.
This “program” sacrifices intellectual honesty and professional
ethics and prevents sincere leaders in the industry from speaking
out on issues related to some of the bizarre educational and
massage therapy practices seen in many if not most massage schools
and promoted by the massage associations and certifying
organizations. Those leaders in the field that go along to get
along are the sell outs and have prostituted their profession.
Leaders who sincerely would like to speak out are afraid to do so
for fear of being “cutoff†from the money and shunned.
The fuel that drives this well organized and very lucrative system
is a constant supply of fresh students. These students, many of
whom will never successfully find jobs or enter the field, provide
revenue to the entire system which at least manages to keep them in
the schools, associations, and certified long enough to get their
tuition money, book and equipment sales, membership fees, and
national board certification fees. This is major revenue, and a
constant supply of student enrollments among the association
aligned massage schools keeps the machine well oiled and the wheels
turning.
This is largely how the industry works. If you are a part of this
œprogram all is good, even though there is conflict between the
major players such as the ABMP and the AMTA, but overall the
industry has achieved a degree of internal balance, the entry of
corporate career colleges and vocational schools into the industry
creates a new and unknown paradigm and threatens to upset this
balance of power.
There is also a major philosophical and practical difference
between the educational approach and offerings of career colleges
and traditional massage schools. The career college is an
educational institution that provides courses or programs in
massage therapy, the massage school is most often a group of
massage therapists who teach massage. The career college is
populated by well educated and experienced educators and
administrators, and the massage school largely employs massage
therapists without recognized educational credentials.
If nothing else the Ralph Stephen article attacking career
colleges and distance education has focused a spotlight on the
issues and the problems that have resulted from the NCBTMB policy
related to denying massage student access to distance education.
One can only ask the NCBTMB whether they were even aware that
career colleges were offering access to distance education to their
massage students before they enacted their new “in classâ€
eligibility criteria.
Experienced educators and those with legal knowledge of the
educational industry also know that there is no established
definition of “in class or classroom, everything has been
changed with the advent of computer based educational technology,
which leaves the question, What is a classroom with very
interesting and diverse answers.
Even the NCBTMB has failed to offer a specific written definition
of what they mean by “in class and have failed to respond to
written requests for clarification while at the same time admitting
that they are conducting a hasty internal investigation and review
of distance education and how it might be added to their criteria
in the future. In other words, Ooops we messed up!
We could also point out that the NCBTMB test is entirely computer
based, and has no practical hands on component.
The Ralph Stephens article ends with a thinly veiled threat of
potential legal action by the NCBTMB and an invitation to students
to report career colleges providing distance education access.
Since the NCBTMB failed to engage the career college community in
the decision making process relative to their decision to block
massage student access to distance education and since they have
failed to provide specific definitions of their in class
terminology, and justifications for denying access to distance
education lecture courses in basic health science and business
classes for students, I would imagine that they will have a
difficult time in any legal action that they may pursue.
Since they are failing to provide competent oversight through their
quasi legal role as a portal to massage licensure (by not properly
enforcing their own in class eligibility criteria) they are most
likely in serious legal do-do themselves.
Lawsuits are wasteful, time consuming, and costly, and the AMTA
which is engaged in multi million dollar litigation with a
disgruntled massage school owner knows this very well. It would be
far better for the NCBTMB to join the rest of the educational
community and develop a well defined plan allowing distance
education lecture classes while preserving their hands on manual
skills training requirements. The higher road is through
consultation and not through litigation.
Hopefully, Ralph Stephens threatening rhetoric does not reflect the
position of the NCBTMB which has enough problems with unhappy state
boards and the new Federation of State Massage Therapy Boards.
The NCBTMB has been listening to traditional massage schools
without the expertise or resources to properly develop and deliver
distance education programs and who do not want to compete in a
free and open market against schools that can competently deliver
distance education programs. The NCBTMB needs to recognize the
changes in the massage industry, its future direction, and the fact
that career colleges will have an increasing role in massage
education.
If the NCBTMB cannot be a responsible partner within this process,
then they need go away.
To the career college administrator reading this article, do you
know to which organization your massage instructors are directing
your students for membership? Would it happen to be the very
organizations using that membership money to lobby against your
distance education programs?
Kevin Kiely
crossmedia@hushmail.com
Leave a Reply