11: REPORT ON A NATIONAL STUDY OF DOCTORAL NURSING FACULTY ■ 261to the follow- up survey. Questions focusing on professional characteristics and faculty
responsibilities such as faculty’s tenure status, rank, years in academia, teaching role, type
of university where employed, presence of an administrative appointment, funding his-
tory, retirement plans, current salary, views on doctoral education, job satisfaction, history
of succession planning, and demographic data were addressed (Table 11.1). In addition,
participants were also qualitatively asked: (a) Please list/ discuss any issues or concerns
you have with DNP education; (b) please list/ discuss any issues or concerns you have
with PhD education; and (c) do you have any particular concerns about your doctoral fac-
ulty role and doctoral nursing education not specifically addressed in this survey (includ-
ing suggestions for questions for the next survey)? This survey had far more qualitative
responses than the first study, and the authors are seeking publication of these findings as
this text goes to press. Chiefly, we want to disseminate our qualitative finding to a large
population of DNP- prepared nurses.
Data Analyses
Frequencies and percentages were reported for the closed- ended questions. For questions
that required participants to rank order multiple items, the final ranking was derived by
using a weighted score to rank each item response. Finally, separate Pearson chi- square
analyses were performed to ascertain whether there were differences among faculty who
were teaching in a DNP program only, a PhD program only, or in both programs on
selected questions. The Fisher’s Exact test was used instead of the chi- square if the fre-
quency of responses for a particular category was low and the assumption of expected
count greater than 5 in each cell was violated. Level of significance for all tests were set at
alpha = 0.05. All data were entered and analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences (SPSS) for Windows, Version 23 (© SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, http://www.spss.com ).
Synopsis of the 2012 Report on a National Study of Doctoral Nursing Faculty
This was the original national study of doctoral nursing faculty, including both PhD and
DNP faculty. Using a national sample of N = 624 doctoral nursing faculty, the research-
ers surveyed individuals on a variety of issues including succession planning, retire-
ment, quality of life as a doctoral faculty member, their views on the new DNP degree,
and how they viewed the future of doctoral nursing education. We summarize here
some of the essential questions from the 2012 study:
- Who will teach DNP students if the DNP degree does not prepare graduates
for their role as expert educators in graduate nursing programs (largely in ad-
vanced practice nursing programs)? This issue was prevalent at the beginning
of the DNP degree movement, and remains unresolved. - With the demand for advanced practice nurse educators to maintain clinical
competency to retain national certification, will future graduate APRN faculty
(for both MSN and DNP programs) be marginalized and largely excluded
from tenure- track positions with their inability to also engage in seeking and
securing funded research? Just over half (52%) of the 2012 study sample were
tenured, but declining tenure percentages among doctoral nursing faculty
were projected and not just because of controversy around whether DNP fac-
ulty should be eligible for tenure- track positions. - With a national and global recession and intense competition for resources,
will the need for additional start- up resources for DNP programs cause PhD
programs to lose resources? In the 2012 study, data were collected during
the end of the global recession and while uncertainty or negative predictions