Experts Validate Competency Development Levels for Undergraduate Physiotherapy Curriculum

Researchers have established content validity for a reconstructed developmental progression of sixty competency levels designed for an undergraduate physiotherapy curriculum, following a two-stage methodological investigation evaluated by expert panels. The reconstruction process initially generated an initial version comprising 54 competency development levels directly from the existing curriculum. Following systematic expert-guided refinement, Version 2 comprised 60 competency development levels structured across three progressive tiers of training, encompassing 17 introductory levels, 21 reinforcement levels, and 22 consolidation levels.

The investigation addressed an ongoing structural challenge within competency-based education, which has become a central framework in physiotherapy education. Beyond defining the exit competencies expected of graduates, competency-based education requires explicit developmental pathways that support daily teaching and formal assessment. In many undergraduate curricula, however, this developmental progression remains implicit rather than systematically defined. To resolve this curricular gap, the study aimed to reconstruct the implicit competency progression within an existing undergraduate physiotherapy curriculum and establish the content validity of the resulting competency development levels.

To establish these educational benchmarks, the authors conducted a two-stage methodological study. In the first stage, competency development levels were reconstructed directly from the existing undergraduate curriculum. In the second stage, a two-phase content validation process was conducted through expert judgment. In Phase 1, an expert panel of five specialists evaluated the preliminary competency development levels according to clarity, coherence, relevance, and sufficiency using a four-point ordinal scale. The investigators gathered both quantitative ratings and qualitative feedback from this initial panel to guide descriptor refinement.

Following the descriptor refinement process, Phase 2 engaged a separate panel of five different experts to evaluate the revised version of the competency levels. Inter-rater agreement across the evaluations was formally assessed using Fleiss’ Kappa statistics. The analysis revealed that Fleiss’ Kappa values were higher across all four dimensions—clarity, coherence, relevance, and sufficiency—in Phase 2 compared to Phase 1. However, the researchers noted that changes occurring simultaneously in both the written descriptors and the composition of the expert panel preclude attributing this statistical difference solely to descriptor refinement.

The study concluded that the reconstruction process successfully made explicit the developmental progression implicit in an existing undergraduate curriculum while providing empirical evidence of content validity for the resulting competency development levels. The authors noted that this methodological approach may provide a basis for adaptation in other physiotherapy curricula seeking to define explicit developmental pathways. Nonetheless, the researchers emphasized that the transferability of the reconstructed levels and the validation approach requires empirical examination in other institutional contexts.

Subject of Research: Content validation of competency development levels in physiotherapy education

Article Title: Content validation of competency development levels for a physiotherapy curriculum: a two-phase study with an expert panel

Article References: Angarita-Rodríguez, D. C., Acosta Otálora, M. L., Álvarez Botia, H. N., González Umana, N. N., Vázquez Galvis, M. J., Villarreal Rodríguez, M., & Vera-Monroy, S. P. (2026). Content validation of competency development levels for a physiotherapy curriculum: a two-phase study with an expert panel. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-10750-5

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12909-026-10750-5

Keywords: physiotherapy education, competency-based education, curriculum development, content validation, expert panel, competency levels, Fleiss kappa, undergraduate curriculum, Content, validation, competency, development