276 ■ III: ROLE FUNCTIONS OF DOCTORAL ADVANCED NURSING PRACTICE
in both programs the percentage was 57%. These numbers across programs seem con-
sistent, but overall they do not appear to be exceptionally high. What is interesting is
that when these same faculty were queried about how future doctoral nursing faculty
in their own institutions will view the quality of their work life, the 54% (“very satis-
fied”) declines to 17%, and the 86% (“very” and “moderately” satisfied) declines to 69%.
This indicates that the current doctoral nursing faculty do not think that future doctoral
nursing faculty will have the same quality of work life that they currently enjoy.
As in 2012, doctoral faculty rank higher salaries as their chief concern. Internal
resources for scholarship and reduced teaching load ranked second and third in prior-
ity, followed by improved climate for intellectual discourse and higher quality students.
Salary issues are well known among nursing faculty, but what constitutes “internal
resources for scholarship” is unclear. While the authors of this survey considered this
item might include, for example, grantsmanship support, editing services, and ade-
quate travel support for professional meetings, it is clear that individual respondents
may have thought this meant something different.
Most faculty members (57%) felt very confident in their PhD or DNP depart-
ment chairs, representing only a slight drop from 63% of respondents in 2012. This
stability may be related to the slight increase (6%) in enthusiasm and optimism
expressed for the future of doctoral education in general, rising to a high of 76%, and
a decrease in the perception that the DNP will negatively impact PhD resources—
perhaps an indication of trust in administration decision making although not a
resounding display of confidence. Clearly diminishing grants and other funding
streams will also negatively impact PhD resources and remain a concern for doctoral
faculty. In this current environment, it is essential that the individuals serving in
academic nursing administrator roles, are adequately prepared to merit and sustain
faculty confidence.
Perhaps our greatest concern arising from the findings in this survey was that the
percentage of respondents who thought it would be more challenging than it is today
(42%) or nearly impossible (27%) for future doctoral faculty, particularly those teach-
ing in DNP programs, to have the time to pursue substantive scholarship to achieve
success on the tenure track and maintain the requisite number of hours for certifica-
tion remains consistent with those in 2012. Combined, this percentage is 69%, and is
exactly what was reported in 2012. Despite the earlier high optimism percentages,
the additional data reflect another concurrent, persistent pessimistic view among cur-
rent PhD and DNP faculty. This is of particular concern since, as mentioned earlier,
there are now more DNP programs, students, and graduations compared to the PhD
(AACN, 2015c). Will these trends eventually impact nursing academia? Who actually
will comprise the majority of nursing faculty in the future? It is likely that DNP- pre-
pared faculty will constitute the majority ranks of nursing faculty period, and this was
projected by 60% ( N = 459) of respondents. Seventeen percent did not think that the
DNP degree would predominate in nursing academic (over the PhD), and 23% were
uncertain. The numbers alone seem to project that DNP degree will become more
common than the PhD in academia. Already the AACN indicates that during the per-
iod from 2009 to 2010 some 24% of DNP graduates were employed in a nursing faculty
position (Fang , Tracy, & Bednash, 2009– 2010). Ketefian and Redman (2015) point out
that there is a
mismatch between the DNP educational preparation and the employment
the graduates are seeking. The stated goal of the DNP is advanced practice to
improve patient care, but the majority are taking faculty positions for which
their education has not prepared them. (p. 369)