20 ■ I: HISTORICAL AND THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS FOR ROLE DELINEATION
practice profession, is this realistic? Foremost, what is needed most in undergraduate
and APN education is to have faculty who are current and competent in the nursing
practice they are teaching. I recall very vividly in my own master’s education in the
late 1980s how a very talented pathophysiology instructor (with an MSN) was removed
from the teaching roster in favor of a faculty member with a doctorate who had very
little background or currency in the topic. We literally taught ourselves each week with
class presentations. Most current MSN- prepared nursing faculty have no aim to be
nurse scientists, and thus the PhD option (which takes an average of 8.3 years to com-
plete post a master’s degree!) for many reasons is not attractive (Valiga, 2004). Since
Valiga’s report, some PhD programs tried to decrease the total time to complete the
degree. We suspect there may have been marginal improvements, but this is another
area where reliable, contemporary data are elusive. Further, many nursing schools pro-
hibit their own master’s- prepared faculty from matriculating internally in their own
doctoral nursing programs due to potential conflicts of interest. Instead, they must go to
another university for the nursing doctorate or attend a non- nursing, internally offered
doctorate where they might get tuition support as an employee benefit. And even in
those universities that do permit internal matriculation, “faculty- as- students” face con-
flicts of interest when nursing faculty attend classes taught (and graded) by their peers
and colleagues (Anselmi, Dreher, Smith Glasgow, & Donnelly, 2010). If the PhD is not an
option, then what other nursing degree can faculty attend?
The DNP degree is being increasingly suggested as a solution to the nursing fac-
ulty shortage. But despite internal disagreements within the profession on this issue,
the nursing educator role is not a role supported by the AACN within the confines of
the normal DNP curriculum (AACN, 2006; Fitzpatrick, 2008). Authors in this text argue
for this to change, especially because Zungolo (2009) indicates that more than 30% of
all DNP graduates are going into academia. This more than supports earlier data from
Loomis, Willard, and Cohen (2006) indicating that 55% of a sample of current DNP stu-
dents ( N = 69) had intentions of pursuing a career in nursing education postgraduation.
A 2013 Texas study found that 58% of nursing college/ university faculty or staff who
were pursuing a doctorate, were pursuing the DNP degree. The fear is that these gradu-
ates may be unprepared for the faculty role and may experience even more inequities in
the academy. McKenna (2005) has similarly suggested that “However, a word of warn-
ing; without an adequate background in the knowledge and skills necessary for teach-
ing and scholarship, these people [graduates from practice doctorate programs] may
be set up for failure in the University setting” (p. 246). The AACN (2006) has suggested
that DNP graduates may take extra courses to add the educator role to the DNP degree.
Again, this seems reminiscent of Melosh’s (1982) earlier critique of nursing leadership’s
professionalizers. The NLN (2007), however, has indicated some displeasure with the
DNP degree being promoted as a solution to the nursing faculty shortage, especially as
the NLN (2007) has a central mission to conduct nursing education research and most
DNP graduates are not educated to do this. In their Reflection and Dialogue web series,
they write:
However, foundational essentials for DNP curriculum design do not include
courses related to pedagogy, evaluation, academic role issues and elements,
and educational theory, and the NLN fears that graduates of such programs
will lack the complex and specialized knowledge intrinsic to the advanced
practice role of nurse educator. (p. 1)In 2010, the NLN clearly pronounced that “Advanced practice nurses must have
in- depth clinical knowledge of nursing practice; similarly, both part- and full- time