FROM THE ACADEMY
Entry-Level Dietetics Practice Today: Results
from the 2015 Commission on Dietetic
Registration Entry-Level Dietetics Practice Audit
Kelly Griswold; Dick Rogers; Kevin L. Sauer, PhD, RDN, LD; Paula Kellogg Leibovitz, MS, RDN, CDN, CDE; Jeri R. Finn, MS, RDN, LD
W
ITH RESPONSIBILITIES IN
the areas of credential-
ing, education, and
practice standards, the
Commission on Dietetic Registration
(CDR), Accreditation Council for Edu-
cation in Nutrition and Dietetics
(ACEND), and the Academy of Nutrition
and Dietetics have need of current,
comprehensive information on di-
etetics practice. One response to this
has been to periodically conduct
empirical practice analyses to profile
what registered dietitian nutritionists
(RDNs) and nutrition and dietetics
technicians, registered (NDTRs) actu-
ally do in practice.1-8
Under the leadership of CDR’s Di-
etetics Practice Audit Task Force
(including volunteer leaders and key
professional staff), perspectives on
contemporary dietetics practice have
been updated through the 2015 Entry-
Level Dietetics Practice Audit. As with
the most recent previous implementa-
tion in 2010, this Audit focuses solely
on the nature of entry-level dietetics
practice.
The primary objective of the Audit
was to provide quantitative measures
of entry-level dietetics activities: level
of involvement, frequency of involve-
ment, and the associated risk for both
RDNs and NDTRs. These data are
sought primarily to inform the devel-
opment and validation of the Com-
mission’s registration examinations for
the RDN and NDTR credentials. As
required in the Standards for Accredi-
tation of Certification Programs of the
National Commission for Certifying
Agencies, certification programs must
employ assessment instruments that
2212-2672/Copyright ª 2016 by the
Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2016.08.003
1632 JOURNAL OF THE ACADEMY OF NUTRITION AND DIETETICS
are derived from job/practice analysis
and that are consistent with generally
accepted psychometric principles.9 As
stated in the Standards for Educational
and Psychological Testing,10 the knowl-
edge or skills being assessed by licen-
sure and certification tests should be
justified, and practice analyses (job
analyses) should provide the primary
basis for defining examination content
domain.
There were several secondary objec-
tives of the Audit, including dis-
tinguishing between entry-level RDN
and entry-level NDTR practice, and
examining differences and similarities
between NDTRs registered via Pathway
I and Pathway III.* New to the 2015
Audit was a series of enhanced
employment-related questions, added
to better understand the employment
situations of those currently working in
dietetics and those who are not.
Also new to the 2015 Audit was the
investigation of knowledge areas. In
development of the registration exam,
the knowledge, skills, and abilities
needed for successful entry-level
practice are generally inferred from
the activities discovered to constitute
it. However, the Task Force felt there
are certain knowledge areas exercised
in practice that may not be implied by
any of the activities measured. To
fill this gap, the Audit presented a
battery of knowledge statements (20 to
*Pathway I¼completion of an asso-
ciate degree from an ACEND accredited
Dietetic Technician Program and a
supervised practice. Pathway III (first
available in 2009)¼completion of a
baccalaureate degree from an ACEND
accredited Didactic Program in Di-
etetics (DPD) or Coordinated Program
in Dietetics (CP). Pathway III does not
require completion of a supervised
practice.
ª 2016 by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.
entry-level RDNs, 19 to entry-level
NDTRs) that were based on ACEND’s
framework of Core Knowledge State-
ments.11 For each of the knowledge
statements, respondents were asked to
report the frequency with which they
have personally applied the knowledge
area in the last year, and to rate the risk
to service recipients and/or their orga-
nizations if a practitioner’s knowledge
in the area is inadequate.
This article presents the results that
apply to the primary objective—
providing quantitative measures of
entry-level practice activity for both
RDNs and NDTRs. A separate article will
analyze practice similarities and differ-
ences between entry-level RDNs and
NDTRs, and between NDTRs registered
via Pathway I and Pathway III.
METHODOLOGY
A mixed-mode survey (mail and
Internet) of recently registered entry-
level RDNs and NDTRs was conducted
to collect Audit data. The primary
component of the survey was a battery
of 176 activity statements, believed to
constitute the majority of entry-level
RDN and NDTR practice. This battery
A Message from CDR: The credentialing
processes administered by CDR exist to
protect and improve the health of the
public and supports practitioner compe-
tence, quality practice, lifelong learning,
and career advancement. The CDR Practice
Audit Task Force recognizes the collabora-
tion of many interdisciplinary professionals
who underscored the importance of this
systematic and evidenced-based approach
to inform the profession, revise the RDN
and NDTR examinations, and to protect the
public. The generous response to the
comprehensive survey reflects the healthy
commitment of entry-level RDN and NDTR
practitioners to their field and of those
who supported many aspects of the prac-
tice audit processes. On behalf of the
Commission—thank you!