Person: "Well, the dog is house trained, but only for my house."
Me: "Ok."
Person: "And she doesn't come anywhere near to being as good as your old one. She's pretty much Satan."
Me: "Oh."
Person: "Oh, and she's also in between flea medications. Sorry. If you see one, just give her a bath with this special lotion."
Me: "Alright."
Person: "Welp, gotta go. See ya."
Friday, August 28, 2015
Friday, August 21, 2015
Anybody Else?
When you disagree with just about every comment that your professor leaves on your paper...
 |
| "It's a research paper! The heading IS the transition!" |
Wednesday, August 19, 2015
Everybody in Prison's Innocent
That moment when you have to peer-edit your fellow students' papers.
I absolutely detest peer-editing.
Professor: "Well, I'm too lazy to edit the paper myself, so I'll just have my students do it for me! And make it a grade! That'll work!"
I always end up with the paper that is in dire need of help, or the grader who thinks that peer-editing means you have to be a writing Nazi and mark up the paper as much as possible because THAT must be what the professor is looking for.
I fail to see how either scenario is helpful.
My latest encounter with peer-editing involved my grading a paper for a girl who clearly did not put in the appropriate amount of energy.
The paper was atrocious. To be in grad school, you should have some level of writing already mastered and this paper did not demonstrate it at all. We're talking fragments and nonsense all over the place. And I'm not one of the grammar Nazis either. Many times, if the paper looks fine, I'll send it back with maybe a few comments, but I try not to overdo it.
This paper was different though. It was terrible.
On top of all that, I found that the writer had inserted an extra space at the beginning of every sentence. For a paper with an assigned length to it, that looks veeeeeery suggestive of cheating to me.
And so, I put in a comment.
"I first thought this was isolated incidences here and there, but I've now noticed that you've put an extra space between the beginning of every sentence. Is this to increase the paper length?"
I'm not stupid. I know just about every trick in the book when it comes to increasing the length of a paper. Increasing every period's size one point, an extra "Enter" at the end of every page, yada yada yada.
And so, that's what this looked like.
The writer emailed me back saying that I was unprofessional and that she "didn't appreciate my snarky comments".
Well, shoot.
I don't think I'm going to reply to that email, but I think I now have further ammunition against why I hate peer-editing.
Time to go for a hike.
I absolutely detest peer-editing.
Professor: "Well, I'm too lazy to edit the paper myself, so I'll just have my students do it for me! And make it a grade! That'll work!"
I always end up with the paper that is in dire need of help, or the grader who thinks that peer-editing means you have to be a writing Nazi and mark up the paper as much as possible because THAT must be what the professor is looking for.
I fail to see how either scenario is helpful.
My latest encounter with peer-editing involved my grading a paper for a girl who clearly did not put in the appropriate amount of energy.
The paper was atrocious. To be in grad school, you should have some level of writing already mastered and this paper did not demonstrate it at all. We're talking fragments and nonsense all over the place. And I'm not one of the grammar Nazis either. Many times, if the paper looks fine, I'll send it back with maybe a few comments, but I try not to overdo it.
This paper was different though. It was terrible.
On top of all that, I found that the writer had inserted an extra space at the beginning of every sentence. For a paper with an assigned length to it, that looks veeeeeery suggestive of cheating to me.
And so, I put in a comment.
"I first thought this was isolated incidences here and there, but I've now noticed that you've put an extra space between the beginning of every sentence. Is this to increase the paper length?"
I'm not stupid. I know just about every trick in the book when it comes to increasing the length of a paper. Increasing every period's size one point, an extra "Enter" at the end of every page, yada yada yada.
And so, that's what this looked like.
The writer emailed me back saying that I was unprofessional and that she "didn't appreciate my snarky comments".
Well, shoot.
I don't think I'm going to reply to that email, but I think I now have further ammunition against why I hate peer-editing.
Time to go for a hike.
Sunday, August 9, 2015
Why Do Physical Therapy Assistants Get Paid More Than Exercise Physiologists?
Why do physical therapy assistants get paid more than exercise physiologists?
It doesn't make much sense, does it?
To become an exercise physiologist typically involves at least a bachelor's in exercise science, and in many cases grad school as well. Then, at the very end you have to take an incredibly difficult certification exam.
The end result is a job with a great amount of autonomy, where your time is spent helping people who have had heart attacks/open heart surgery/lung transplants/etc. get back on their feet via exercise.
You have to understand EKGs, how medicines affect heart rate, exercise recommendations for a variety of conditions, biomechanics, how to know when your patient is hypoglycemic, gym structure, sales, and often a lot of business-keeping work as well.
The end result? An average salary of $47,000, according to indeed.com, and I've yet to meet an EP that makes that much.
A physical therapist's assistant however, goes to school for two years, typically at a community college setting, before taking a licensure exam. They have very little autonomy whatsoever, basically being at the mercy of the local physical therapist. They too understand some biomechanics, as well as exercise recommendations for a variety of conditions, but not to the extent that an EP is going to.
However, they're average salary is $59,000.
What gives?
How does more schooling, and more knowledge not equal more money?
My theory? Physical therapy leads to more tangible results, and provides a more exclusive service.
If a 44 year old mailman ends up with a frozen shoulder, he's going to be referred to physical therapy. He knows that he's not going to get better without it, and he desperately wants to be able to put his arm above his head again. He goes to PT, they work on the issue, the shoulder's fixed, and he never has another problem with it.
The mailman can vividly see the changes that PT worked for him, and nobody else would have been able to provide him that service.
Contrast that to the 44 year old mailman who has a heart attack. The doctor will refer him to cardiac rehab, but he may not even decide to show up. He knows that he needs to do cardio, so he decides to start riding the bike he's had stored in his basement the past 15 years. He may not know the correct target heart rate, the correct seat height, and how to progress, but he knows how to ride a bike by himself, and that's what he's gonna do.
Why waste money for an EP to tell him the same thing? That tends to be the mindset, anyway, even if it's not the case.
An exercise physiologist's services tend to be viewed as common knowledge, even though that's not the case.
"Oh, exercise more, and eat less. That's all they're gonna tell me."
Somebody with severe joint pain or post-orthopedic surgery is going to do what it takes to get themselves back to being pain-free with a full ROM. Pain is a powerful motivator.
Somebody with a cardiac or pulmonary condition is not necessarily living with pain, however, and they may see their event as a one time thing. You can see the differences in level of pain when PT is helping you out with your low back pain. You can't see the differences in decreasing your risk of future MI via working with an EP. Sure, you may feel healthier, and lose a bit of weight working with an EP, but you may still have a cardiac event anyway, and so what's the use, right?
So it all comes down to the type of patients that a PTA is going to work with compared with the patients that an EP is going to work with.
A PTA is going to work with people in severe amounts of pain, who will do anything to get back to where they were. Nobody else is legally licensed to work with these same customers over these same issues, and so they have an exclusive customer base. (=more money)
An EP is not always working with people in severe pain (CABG being the exception), and a lot of times work with weight loss clients, diabetic clients, and other clients who have similar issues. There's a lot of competition for these people. Local gyms, personal trainers, Weight Watchers, Nutrisystem - all of these people are competing for an EP's customer base.
Nobody says that a personal trainer can't workout with his client that had an MI and stent a month ago.
He can't provide "cardiac rehab", but who's to say that he can't put his client on a progressive cardio plan starting off slow working on the bike, treadmill, and rower? Nobody.
Does this mean that an EP is going to be less knowledgeable about these issues than all of the other options? By no means. It's typically the opposite. But that's where marketing comes into play, and an EP has to be a good salesman if he wants to keep clients coming his way. A PTA doesn't have to worry about this. The PT takes care of it for them.
And that is why physical therapist's assistants make a significant amount of more money than an exercise physiologist. If you want patients to come specifically to you, you have to figure out a way to provide an exclusive service, and then market it as such.
It doesn't make much sense, does it?
To become an exercise physiologist typically involves at least a bachelor's in exercise science, and in many cases grad school as well. Then, at the very end you have to take an incredibly difficult certification exam.
The end result is a job with a great amount of autonomy, where your time is spent helping people who have had heart attacks/open heart surgery/lung transplants/etc. get back on their feet via exercise.
You have to understand EKGs, how medicines affect heart rate, exercise recommendations for a variety of conditions, biomechanics, how to know when your patient is hypoglycemic, gym structure, sales, and often a lot of business-keeping work as well.
The end result? An average salary of $47,000, according to indeed.com, and I've yet to meet an EP that makes that much.
A physical therapist's assistant however, goes to school for two years, typically at a community college setting, before taking a licensure exam. They have very little autonomy whatsoever, basically being at the mercy of the local physical therapist. They too understand some biomechanics, as well as exercise recommendations for a variety of conditions, but not to the extent that an EP is going to.
However, they're average salary is $59,000.
What gives?
How does more schooling, and more knowledge not equal more money?
My theory? Physical therapy leads to more tangible results, and provides a more exclusive service.
If a 44 year old mailman ends up with a frozen shoulder, he's going to be referred to physical therapy. He knows that he's not going to get better without it, and he desperately wants to be able to put his arm above his head again. He goes to PT, they work on the issue, the shoulder's fixed, and he never has another problem with it.
The mailman can vividly see the changes that PT worked for him, and nobody else would have been able to provide him that service.
Contrast that to the 44 year old mailman who has a heart attack. The doctor will refer him to cardiac rehab, but he may not even decide to show up. He knows that he needs to do cardio, so he decides to start riding the bike he's had stored in his basement the past 15 years. He may not know the correct target heart rate, the correct seat height, and how to progress, but he knows how to ride a bike by himself, and that's what he's gonna do.
Why waste money for an EP to tell him the same thing? That tends to be the mindset, anyway, even if it's not the case.
An exercise physiologist's services tend to be viewed as common knowledge, even though that's not the case.
"Oh, exercise more, and eat less. That's all they're gonna tell me."
Somebody with severe joint pain or post-orthopedic surgery is going to do what it takes to get themselves back to being pain-free with a full ROM. Pain is a powerful motivator.
Somebody with a cardiac or pulmonary condition is not necessarily living with pain, however, and they may see their event as a one time thing. You can see the differences in level of pain when PT is helping you out with your low back pain. You can't see the differences in decreasing your risk of future MI via working with an EP. Sure, you may feel healthier, and lose a bit of weight working with an EP, but you may still have a cardiac event anyway, and so what's the use, right?
So it all comes down to the type of patients that a PTA is going to work with compared with the patients that an EP is going to work with.
A PTA is going to work with people in severe amounts of pain, who will do anything to get back to where they were. Nobody else is legally licensed to work with these same customers over these same issues, and so they have an exclusive customer base. (=more money)
An EP is not always working with people in severe pain (CABG being the exception), and a lot of times work with weight loss clients, diabetic clients, and other clients who have similar issues. There's a lot of competition for these people. Local gyms, personal trainers, Weight Watchers, Nutrisystem - all of these people are competing for an EP's customer base.
Nobody says that a personal trainer can't workout with his client that had an MI and stent a month ago.
He can't provide "cardiac rehab", but who's to say that he can't put his client on a progressive cardio plan starting off slow working on the bike, treadmill, and rower? Nobody.
Does this mean that an EP is going to be less knowledgeable about these issues than all of the other options? By no means. It's typically the opposite. But that's where marketing comes into play, and an EP has to be a good salesman if he wants to keep clients coming his way. A PTA doesn't have to worry about this. The PT takes care of it for them.
And that is why physical therapist's assistants make a significant amount of more money than an exercise physiologist. If you want patients to come specifically to you, you have to figure out a way to provide an exclusive service, and then market it as such.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)