11: REFLECTIVE RESPONSE ■ 281are entrusted with its care now and in the future; they preserve the essence of the field
while taking risks to move the discipline forward. Disciplinary stewardship entails
ensuring the preparation of new generations of scholars who understand the disci-
pline’s development from its origins, as well as the wise application of major precepts
now and in the future.
In recent years, education about evidence- based practice has, to a great extent,
replaced education about the conduct of research in nursing at the baccalaureate and
master’s degree levels (American Association of Colleges of Nursing [AACN], 2008,
2011). The value and relevance of work that is regarded as theoretical may be ignored
or discounted at these levels. Some leaders in evidence- based practice believe that it is
counterproductive to teach the research process to baccalaureate and master’s degree
students (Melnyk, 2014). This phenomenon, coupled with the shift in the doctoral prep-
aration of faculty that was noted earlier, will result in students of the future having little
or no exposure to the process of knowledge generation that is a hallmark of PhD prepa-
ration. There will be little incentive for students to consider earning a research doctorate
because they will have had little exposure to role models, and it is possible that they will
be unfamiliar with the contributions of nurse scientists. It is likely that they will have
heard that earning a PhD takes much longer than a DNP, which further diminishes like-
lihood that they will entertain the option of a PhD.
Education for evidence- based practice emphasizes the examination of recent
research to determine best clinical practices (LoBiondo- Wood & Haber, 2013). One of the
unanticipated consequences of this trend is the danger of what has been termed disci-
plinary amnesia (Vannini, 2008). Disciplinary amnesia is the disappearance of important
concepts, constructs, or theories from a field of study in response to redefinitions or to
barriers imposed by the discipline. Barriers may be associated with, for example, socio-
political or economic trends, or cultural shifts within the discipline. The loss of knowl-
edge is problematic because it can undermine the process of building the discipline
and promote inefficiency when, years later, lost knowledge is hypothesized anew and
precious human and financial resources are expended on its rediscovery. Numerous
current examples in nursing come to mind for which historical antecedents are plenti-
ful, such as, patient- centered care or social determinants of health.
Given these factors of the shift in the preparation of doctorally prepared faculty
and the emphasis in nursing education on evidence- based practice at the expense of
knowledge generation and theory building, the ability of the discipline of nursing to ful-
fill its scientific mission in the future is of concern, as Smith et al. have noted. Moreover,
if PhDs are recruited into academia, despite barriers such as salary that Smith et al. iden-
tified, they may find themselves in institutions or teaching appointments in which they
are encumbered with heavy teaching loads that jeopardize their ability to contribute
substantially to the generation of knowledge through research (Smeltzer et al., 2014).
■ IMPLICATIONS
All doctorally prepared nurses have much to contribute to the clinical, educational, lead-
ership, and scientific agendas of the discipline of nursing. The translation of knowledge
generated by the conduct of research into practice is of critical importance in ensur-
ing safe, cost- effective, accessible, and high- quality health care for the public. Clearly,
though, nurse scientists prepared with a PhD degree are an increasingly scarce resource.
Several strategies with the potential to encourage nurses to earn PhDs, and to recruit
and retain them in academic settings follow.