1. Faculty Retirement Projections.
Regression analysis of faculty 62 years and younger found that the mean age was increasing at almost half a year per year (0.43) for full-time doctorally prepared faculty. Retirement projections for individuals who were faculty in 2001 revealed that from 2004 through 2012, between 200 and 300 doctorally-prepared faculty will be eligible for retirement annually. The modal year of retirement is 2009 (Berlin & Sechrist 2002a). The mean age for the 2001 full-time master's faculty cohort was increasing a third of a year per year (0.33), and from 2012 through 2018 between 220 and 280 master's faculty will be eligible to retire each year; the modal retirement year is 2015 (Berlin & Sechrist, 2002b). These projections represent the best case scenario, based on the conservative assumptions that faculty will work until age 62 and that there will be no additional departures from academic life.

2. Faculty Age Groups.
In conjunction with the increase in mean age, the proportion of full-time doctorally-prepared faculty age 50 and over and under 50 has changed dramatically. In 1993, the proportion of faculty under and over age 50 was almost equal; in 2004 the percentage of those 50 and over increased by 26.5 percent (Berlin & Sechrist, 2002a, 2005a). Full-time master's faculty 50 and over increased from 32.6 to 53.2 percent during the same time period (Berlin & Sechrist, 2002a, 2005b).

Figure 2. Percent of full-time doctorally prepared faculty over and
under the age of 50 for each reporting year, 1993-2004.

B. Departure from Academic Life

1. Decline in Percent of Younger Faculty. Between 1993 and 2004, the percentage of doctorally prepared faculty members in the age categories of 56-65, and over 65 years increased by 19.5 and 2.6 percent, respectively. In contrast, there were decreases in the age groups 35 years and younger (0.6%), 36-45 years (19.4%), and 46-55 years (2.1%) (Figure 3; Berlin & Sechrist, 2002a, 2005c). The decline in the 36-45 group of doctorally prepared faculty is particularly troublesome, given that "the doctoral degree should be considered the appropriate and desired credential for a career as a nurse educator" (AACN, 1996, p. 3). Advancement to the next age category accounts for some of the decline, but egression from academic life is the major reason for the loss of younger faculty members. Master's prepared faculty in the 36-45 year group showed the same pattern of decline (Berlin & Sechrist, 2005d).

Figure 3. Percent of doctorally prepared full-time faculty in each age
category, 1993-2004.

In the 280 schools reporting faculty resignation and retirement data in 2002, 188 full-time doctorally prepared faculty and 202 master's prepared faculty resigned from schools of nursing. Nineteen individuals with doctoral preparation and 62 with master's preparation were between the ages of 36 and 45 years of age. Of those, subsequent employment plans were reported for 16 doctoral and 58 master's resignees. Although over one-half (56.2%) of those with doctoral degrees left to take other school of nursing faculty or administrative positions, seven individuals (43.8%) left academia to assume non-academic positions such as nursing service, private sector, or private practice positions. Forty-three percent (25 individuals) of those with master's preparation resigned to take non-academic jobs (AACN, 2002b).

2. Employment of Doctoral Graduates. Of the 412 doctoral graduates in 2003-2004, post-graduation plans were reported for 307 (78.0%) graduates. Twenty-two percent (22.5%) reported employment commitments in settings other than schools of nursing (AACN, 2005a). This finding is confirmed by data from two additional sources. Data from the Survey of Earned Doctorates indicated that the percent of nursing doctoral recipients planning to be employed in areas other than education increased steadily from 15.5 percent in the time period 1980 through 1984 to 26.9 percent from 1995-1999. Further, teaching as a primary employment activity decreased from 70.8 percent to 59.5 percent during the same two time periods (National Opinion Research Center, 2001). The National Sample Survey of Registered Nurses databases estimated that in 1992, 1996, and 2000 the proportion of nurses with nursing doctorates who were employed in schools of nursing with baccalaureate and higher degrees showed steady declines, going from 68 percent in 1992 to 49 percent in 2000 (Division of Nursing, 2001).

C. Salary Differentials
Salary is an influential factor in the employment decisions of those completing graduate education. In a comparison of responsibilities and salaries associated with various employment opportunities, faculty positions may not be as appealing as other offers. Average salaries for clinical positions have risen more than those for faculty positions because most universities are constrained in their ability to increase faculty salaries (Brendtro & Hegge, 2000; AACN, 1999a). Academic institutions, especially those faced with budget cuts, generally cannot compete with nonacademic employers.

In fall 2004, the median calendar-year salaries for instructional faculty with doctoral degrees with the ranks of associate and assistant professors were $77,605 and $73,333 respectively; for those with master's degrees the median salaries were $62,778 and $58,567 (Berlin, Wilsey, & Bednash, 2005b). A sample of clinical and administrative nursing salaries is presented in Table 1 (Salary.Com, 2005). Since the clinical and administrative salaries are based on a calendar year, academic salaries were converted to calendar year also. (Academic salaries are multiplied by 11/9 or 1.22 for this conversion).

Salary may also be a determinant in the decision of master's prepared nurses to return to doctoral study. Potential students calculate whether it profits them to seek doctoral study and enter academia when they can earn better salaries in non-academic master's-level positions.

D. Tuition and Loan Burden for Graduate Study
Average tuition, required fees, room/board, and percent of loan burden for graduate students by type of institution are presented in Table 2 (Peterson's Colleges of Nursing Database, 2002). In addition to the basic student charges, additional costs include textbooks, medical equipment, uniforms or laboratory coats, transportation to/from clinical sites, and thesis and dissertation expenses. Also, net income foregone is a consideration as the amount may be substantial, especially for full-time study.

E. Diminishing Pipeline of Enrollees and Graduates
Five-year trend data in a cohort of 91 schools reporting data each year to AACN from 2000-2004 showed an average increase of 118 doctoral students per year (p = 0.01). The pattern of graduations, however, indicated no trend (Berlin, Wilsey, & Bednash, 2005a). In the fall of 2003, there were 93 research-focused doctoral programs in nursing, with a total of 3,439 enrollees and 412 graduates. Fifty-three percent of enrollees were part-time students, the major reason that graduates represent only 12 percent of enrollees (Berlin, Wilsey, & Bednash, 2005a). The failure of schools to produce more graduates is particularly disconcerting given that the number of doctoral programs has increased from 54 in 1992 to 93 in 2004 (Berlin, Bednash, & Alsheimer, 1993; Berlin, Wilsey, & Bednash 2005a).

When evaluating the pipeline for doctoral preparation, trends in master's education also must be considered. Enrollments in master's programs declined steadily from 1996 until 2001. However, since 2001 enrollments have increased steadily and the latest five-year cohort of 303 schools reporting data each year from 2000-2004 showed an increase of 1,465 students per year (p=0.02). Five-year graduation patterns showed a steady decline from 2000-2003, followed by an increase of 249 graduates from 2003-2004. Despite the increase this year, regression analysis indicated an average decrease of 117 graduates in per year (Berlin, Wilsey, & Bednash, 2005a). However, graduations will continue to increase over the next several years, a reflection of increased enrollment since 2002. This is noteworthy because master's graduates are the source of a significant percentage of current and future faculty, as well as the source for future doctoral students. On the other hand, the shift of master's prepared faculty to doctoral student status may not increase the number of new people in the faculty pool because many already are functioning in faculty roles.

F. Age of Doctoral Recipients and Time to Degree
Of the 417 recipients of nursing doctoral degrees in 2002 who reported age, the median age was 47.3 years. Almost half of all graduates (50.8%) were between the ages of 45 and 54 years; 12.8 percent were older than 55 years, and only 36 individuals (8.6%) were under the age of 35. In comparison, the median age of all research doctoral awardees in the US in 2002 was 33.3 years (National Opinion Research Center, 2004). Given that the mean age of retirement for full-time doctorally prepared faculty in 2004 was 63.1 years, the number of productive teaching and research years are curtailed because of advanced age at graduation (AACN, 2005b). In 2002, the mean number of years registered in a doctoral program was 8.8 years for nursing graduates compared to 7.5 years for all research awardees. Mean time elapsed between entry in a master's program to completion of the doctorate in nursing was 2.1 years longer than other fields, 10.5 and 8.4 years, respectively (National Opinion Research Center, 2004).

G. Faculty Workload and Role Expectation Issues

1. Job Dissatisfaction. The literature frequently cites dissatisfaction with workplace as a reason for the loss of younger faculty from academia (Brendtro & Hegge, 2000; DeYoung & Bliss, 1995; Ketefian, 1991). Initiatives aimed at increasing the number of faculty will not succeed if faculty are not satisfied and retained. In order to quantify the extent of job dissatisfaction, job satisfaction variables from the 1999 National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (US Department of Education, 2001) were analyzed. Of the 1,073,667 postsecondary faculty in the database, there were an estimated 4,295 full-time nurse faculty holding doctoral degrees whose primary responsibilities consisted of teaching and research. The variables of interest were overall job satisfaction, job security, opportunity for advancement, workload, effectiveness of leadership, salary, benefits, and time to keep current in one's field. Percent of dissatisfaction was compared between two groups: (1) individuals holding the rank of full and associate professor and (2) individuals within the ranks of assistant, instructor, and lecturer. (The public use database would not allow further discrimination of ranks.) Findings revealed that junior faculty (assistant, instructor, and lecturer) reported higher percentages of dissatisfaction than did senior faculty on all variables except one. Junior faculty were not as dissatisfied as senior faculty regarding time available to keep current in one's field. The response to workload was most noteworthy. Dissatisfaction with workload was an estimated 54.7 percent for junior faculty, almost twice that of senior faculty (29.5%) (Berlin & Sechrist, 2003).

2. Role Expectations. Like all academic disciplines, changing faculty workload demands and role expectations are contributing to the nursing faculty shortage. Change is ever present: in the way higher education is conducted; in the traditional roles of teaching, scholarship, and service; and in the characteristics of today's students. These changes challenge faculty, require more time and preparation to be successful in the faculty role, and may cause those not sufficiently prepared to be dissatisfied and leave. The life of the college professor has changed considerably since the late 1980s (Longin, 2002). Describing the professoriate in transition, Berberet and McMillin (2002) highlight the varied responsibilities and stressors of faculty. In addition to the traditional teaching role, they assert that faculty also are expected to obtain extramural funding, conduct research, produce scholarship, and offer community and university service. Most full-time faculty spend extended hours advising and mentoring students outside the classroom, updating curricula, developing new courses, reading to remain current, and mastering new advances in technology. With these multiple demands upon all faculty, "time is becoming their most precious commodity" (p. 2). In fact, in a recent survey, "73 percent of faculty respondents expressed frustration at 'never having time to complete a piece of work'" (p. 9).

3. Today's Student Population
Nontraditional students. In past years, the "traditional" nursing student was an eighteen year old high school graduate entering college directly from high school. Since 1995, the average age of graduates from all nursing programs is 30.9 years, an increase of seven years in the previous decade (Spratley, Johnson, Sochalski, et al., 2001). Now, almost 73 percent of undergraduate students are considered "nontraditional" by virtue of their older age, more independent financial status, delayed entry into higher education, and competing responsibilities such as jobs and families. While the majority of students with the most nontraditional characteristics attend community colleges or private for-profit institutions, 14.4 and 19.0 percent attend public four-year and private not-for-profit institutions, respectively. Most students continue to pursue undergraduate education on a full-time basis, but the number of part-time students has tripled since 1970 (US Department of Education, 2002). Experienced faculty know that these more mature students commit a significant amount of time and energy to their work and family responsibilities. They demand a relevant, no-nonsense approach to education that is immediately applicable and complementary to their lives. Many mature students are gifted in their scholarship, motivation, life experiences, and insights. These characteristics often challenge faculty to plan more creative, practical, and interactive teaching-learning strategies such as case studies, problem-solving exercises, research projects, and service learning experiences. While these approaches may better meet the needs of mature students, they are time-intensive for faculty to develop and monitor.

Multi-generations. According to information gleaned from those who study the various generations, disconnects often occur between the values and characteristics of current older faculty and younger students, according to the age of each. For example, mature faculty members as a whole have very different views about work, authority, relationships, responsibility, and the nature of learning than today's twenty something learners. These characteristic differences require new approaches to teaching-learning to meet the needs of various groups. (Brown, 2001; Zemke, 2001).

Student capabilities. Faculty are challenged by the broad range of student capabilities in today's classrooms, ranging from at-risk to exceptional. Levine and Cureton (1998) describe the current generation of undergraduates, in general, as committed to doing well, but often lacking in basic skills necessary for college-level work. This observation is echoed anecdotally by numerous nursing academics. Even more serious, about one-third of high school students considered at risk for low academic attainment enroll in a four-year college within two years of high school graduation, despite their at-risk status (US Department of Education, 2002). Some of these students may wish to enroll in nursing programs. In order to be successful, students lacking in prerequisite skills often need additional academic help and other types of support. Remedial work for these students, while necessary, consumes valuable faculty time. At the other extreme, exceptional students may be eager for advanced or enrichment opportunities in their studies. Faculty generally are eager to help meet the needs of all students, but developing and implementing activities appropriate for different learner subgroups takes time and energy.

Study habits. Conventional wisdom and many school handbooks suggest three hours of student out-of-class preparation for every credit hour of class. This would be roughly 45 hours of study for 15 class hours per week (five courses of three hours each). However, Young (2002) reported a recent study that described the study habits of recent freshman classes at four-year residential colleges. Sixty three percent of full-time students reported studying 15 hours a week or less, and 19 percent spent only 1-5 hours per week studying. Mature faculty may expect students to demonstrate the self-directed study habits prevalent decades ago. The "Nexter" generation (born after 1980) is characterized as confident, achievement-oriented, tenacious, and optimistic (Zemke, 2001). However, this group may be less independent than the previous age cohort, needing more supervision and structure (Brown, 2001). So, as these students enter nursing programs, faculty may need to help them understand what is required in the way of out of class preparation, provide detailed information about assignments, and clearly identify consequences of missing deadlines or being unprepared.

4. Expectations Unique to Nursing Faculty. In addition to the many roles and responsibilities common to all faculty, additional expectations are placed on nursing faculty. They often are expected to maintain clinical expertise, instruct students in clinical agencies, and engage in faculty practice. Moreover, nursing faculty who supervise students in clinical agencies may be responsible for an increasing number of very ill patients, adding an element not experienced by faculty in non-health care disciplines. Reflecting changing learning and work environments, nursing faculty are expected to develop proficiency in distance learning technology (AACN, 1999b; Potempa, 2001), and revise curricula to prepare graduates to excel in a rapidly changing health care environment (for example, see Tanner, 2001). The increase in mature students in accelerated programs adds the requirement to find challenging experiences for these students. What effect do these multiple roles, high expectations, and increased time commitments have upon the retention of nursing faculty and their ability to fully engage in an academic community? An AACN Issue Bulletin (1999a) on the faculty shortage asserts that faculty life "presents a harder road than private practice or administration" (p. 3). "The expectation on faculty to 'do it all' remains in many [nursing] schools and probably is a major reason for an unhappy and stressful work environment" (Rudy, 2001, p. 402). While further study of faculty workplace issues is needed, several authors report increased stress (Oermann, 1998), emotional exhaustion (Fong, 1993), burnout (Brendtro & Hegge, 2000; De Young & Bliss, 1995), and early retirement (AACN, 1999a) among nursing faculty.

H. Alternative Career Choices
Coupled with inadequate enrollment and graduations in master's and doctoral programs is a lack of preparation and possibly a perceived lack of interest in teaching. In 1976-1977, 24.7 percent of graduates from nursing master's programs were education (teaching) majors (National League for Nursing, 1988). By 1994, only 11.3 percent of graduates majored in education and in 2002 the percentage dropped to 3.5 percent (Berlin & Bednash, 1995; Berlin, Stennett, & Bednash, 2003a). A slight upturn of 5.9 percent of graduates were education majors in 2004 (Berlin, Wilsey, & Bednash, 2005a). However, this was only half the number reported a decade earlier. The overall downward trend in nursing education majors was concomitant with increased emphasis on and interest in the nurse practitioner (NP) role, and since the mid-1990s, NP or combined NP/Clinical Nurse Specialist (CNS) enrollees and graduates have comprised the majority of master's enrollees and graduates. In 2004, 57.0 percent of master's enrollees and 64.4 percent of master's graduates were NP or combined NP/CNS majors (Berlin, Wilsey, & Bednash, 2005a). These programs focus on preparing individuals for clinical practice and may not result in a large number of graduates pursuing doctoral education. Master's degree graduates prepared as NPs found an increasing number of employment opportunities in both ambulatory and hospital-based clinical practice (Hinshaw, 2001). Many of these positions offer a good match between graduates' values and skills and those of their prospective employers.

As noted previously, an increasing percentage of nursing doctoral recipients planned to be employed in settings other than nursing education (National Opinion Research Center, 2001). The primary interest of doctoral program graduates returning to or accepting their first academic appointments is the development of research programs. In some institutions it has been reported that few are interested in teaching, and even fewer are interested in teaching undergraduate students (AACN, 1999a). Although AACN supports doctoral preparation for the faculty role, slightly more than half (52.1%) of current faculty hold master's degrees (Berlin, Wilsey, & Bednash, 2005b). These individuals are invaluable faculty resources. However, "Until we have a faculty that is fully credentialed and contributing to all three aspects of our mission (teaching, research, and service), nursing programs will be vulnerable on campus, because the small numbers of doctorally prepared faculty de facto diminish contributions to the full mission of the institution" (Anderson, 1998, p. 6).

Section III: Short-Term Strategies for Expanding the Capacity of Current Faculty

Section II summarized issues related to the dwindling numbers of full-time faculty. The various challenges described offer nursing education a unique opportunity to develop and implement innovative, practical solutions in response to increasingly complex concerns, as nursing has done successfully throughout its history. The purpose of this section is to outline a variety of short-term strategies to alleviate the faculty shortage. It must be emphasized that many schools have developed exceptionally creative programs and initiatives that respond to current challenges and intercept future problems, including many of the suggestions included in this document. Others may find useful strategies described in this section, and as modeled by other schools. Clearly, not all of the strategies presented here are feasible in every setting, nor is this an exhaustive list. Institutions face different constraints and possibilities, depending on their demographic characteristics and geographic location. Each school is urged to engage in discussions with their own faculty, as well as with institutional, industry, and community leaders to seek location-specific opportunities to expand current faculty capacity.

1. ISSUE: Faculty capacity can be expanded in nontraditional ways with current resources.
Traditionally, nursing has objected to utilizing non-nurse faculty, recruiting nurse faculty with non-nursing degrees, and/or sharing resources and courses across disciplines and specialties, even though these non-traditional approaches may provide an important solution to a nursing faculty shortage and enhance student learning. The time has never been more appropriate to look for new approaches that make more sense. For example, nursing schools can create core courses that meet requirements across several specialty tracks. Interdisciplinary courses such as physical assessment, pharmacology, informatics, and gerontology can be developed on topics applicable to students representing a variety of health professions. Selected nursing classes/courses might be taught by non-nurse faculty, such as physicians, epidemiologists, statisticians, health policy analysts, education specialists, and ethicists. Selected administrative positions might be held by well qualified non-nurses. For example, the Assistant Dean for the undergraduate program at Loyola University Chicago and Associate Dean for Research at the University of California, San Francisco are not nurses. While traditional "team teaching" may be labor intensive, sharing resources and developing joint initiatives among faculty and across programs, disciplines, departments, and even between universities can save money, spare limited faculty resources, and model a spirit of professional and interdisciplinary collaboration, a value that nursing espouses.

Adoption of a broader view of the educational requirements for nurse faculty status deserves special consideration. Advanced practice nurses and other nurses who are skilled in clinical practice, management, teaching, or research but who lack traditional academic preparation in nursing are an untapped resource for faculty. For example, according to data from the National Sample Survey of Registered Nurses, there are an estimated 3,000 advanced practice nurses who are nationally certified, and hold doctoral degrees, but do not hold a master's degree in nursing (Division of Nursing, 2001). Regardless of other credentials, the master's degree in nursing is required by some state regulatory bodies as a prerequisite for nursing faculty positions. This also affects students in some baccalaureate-to-PhD programs that do not receive a master's degree. These students may be required to defer a teaching position until completing the doctorate. As long as these barriers exist, many expert clinicians - and potentially expert faculty - are prevented from teaching when they are needed most. Using these clinicians in creative faculty partnerships, with shared responsibility for courses can expand faculty capacity.

Faculty recruitment might include previously untried outreach strategies. For example, pharmacy education is experiencing the same phenomenon of faculty shortfalls as nursing. For the past three years the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy has sponsored a special session at an American Society of Health-System Pharmacists clinical meeting (American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy, 2003). The two-hour session, titled "Is an Academic Career in My Future?" has enjoyed increasing attendance over the years. The session includes several different speakers who candidly depict the faculty shortage, highlight the many positive aspects of an academic career, and offer specific advice on how to be successful as a faculty member. Similarly, the Medical College of Ohio offers a seminar for master's prepared nurses titled "Are You Interested in Getting a Doctoral Degree?" which includes a segment on academic careers (AACN, 2002c). Nurse educators host, plan, and attend an impressive number and variety of professional conferences and activities in their various professional capacities. Suggesting these types of programs to inform practicing nurses about and attract them to the faculty role may be a good investment. Other schools have developed master's programs that respond to the faculty shortage. The University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences prepares nurse educators in a federally funded master's program specifically designed to attract minority and disadvantaged students, particularly for utilization in underserved parts of the state (AACN, 2003b).

In addition to readily available sources of faculty described above, current approaches can be modified to increase the faculty pool. Traditional nursing programs may not be configured in ways that facilitate a clear and timely path to completion. For example, full-time employed nurses who desire to prepare for the faculty role on a part-time basis may face major impediments to this process. Employed nurses who attempt to combine part-time graduate study with full-time employment often face inflexible work schedules and increased clinical workloads imposed by employers because of the nursing shortage. San Francisco State University's cohort master's program was designed to facilitate the academic experience of working nurses, and has had the additional benefit of increasing the number of graduates accepting teaching positions and pursuing doctoral study (AACN, 2003a). Even though many schools of nursing have modified their graduate programs to make them more available to working students, periodic review of prerequisites, matriculation policies, and class scheduling may be in order to ensure that programs are not unduly exclusive or restrictive. Local nursing executives might be queried about the days their facilities are best staffed so that course days and times can be planned accordingly.

In a similar vein, many nurse educators continue to accept the traditional view that significant clinical experience as a registered nurse is essential before matriculating in a graduate program that prepares students for specialization and/or advanced practice. This position may not be accurate and is not supported in the empirical literature. It certainly bears scrutiny in the face of decreasing faculty resources. While high academic standards should not be compromised, rethinking any artificial eligibility criteria may be a useful strategy to increase enrollments in nursing graduate programs.

Not only should we reconsider the experience prerequisite for nurses seeking graduate education, we also should reconsider whether a nursing undergraduate degree is an essential prerequisite to graduate study in nursing. One excellent source of future faculty includes individuals who earned degrees in fields other than nursing. Second-degree or accelerated programs transition these individuals into nursing careers in streamlined ways and often in an abbreviated time frame. Although these programs are not new, they have proliferated over the past several years. In 1990, there were 31 baccalaureate and 12 master's programs designed for second-degree students (Bednash, Berlin, & Haux, 1991); by fall 2004, there were 150 baccalaureate and 41 master's of these programs in operation (Berlin, Wilsey, & Bednash, 2005a). These individuals bring a wealth of academic ability, knowledge, and experience; plus they offer a different perspective to nursing, patient care, and the health care system (AACN, 2002a; Anderson, 2002). In short, these graduates may make excellent faculty members.

There is no question that nontraditional students pose unique challenges and require creativity and open-mindedness of faculty. We do not yet know if second-degree and accelerated programs are universally successful, and this is an important area of inquiry. One recent study (White, Wax, & Berrey, 2000), described a combined undergraduate and graduate nursing program designed primarily to prepare non-nurses with degrees in other fields for the nurse practitioner (NP) role. The program took roughly three years to complete, consistent with other accelerated master's programs across the country (AACN, 2002a). Twenty-nine graduates participated in the study, answering questions about their experiences. Of the 23 graduates employed as NPs, the majority believed the educational program prepared them adequately for the advanced practice role, attributing this largely to excellent clinical experiences and assignments. Interestingly, the majority did not believe that experience as a registered nurse was necessary to function in the NP role, although many had nursing experience. (The program encouraged all students to work as staff nurses when they became eligible, and 19 had done so.) This illustrates that programs can be designed to provide adequate basic as well as advanced clinical experiences for second-degree or accelerated students. Unfortunately, the authors stated that the graduates' "most commonly mentioned challenges included resistance from nurses, NPs, and traditional students who held the belief that the nontraditional students had not 'paid their dues' the traditional way" (p. 220). Nurse educators may know colleagues who hold similar views and who need encouragement to try nontraditional approaches in these challenging times.

The use of technology can provide additional immediate solutions to increase the capacity of faculty to support education, research, and practice. The growing importance of distance technology, and in particular, Web-based media to deliver educational course work is evident, and it is revolutionizing higher education. However, well-designed distance education programs require long-term planning and considerable institutional financial investment in equipment, support services, and faculty development (AACN, 1999b). Collaboration with existing distance programs may offer a faculty-sparing effect for selected courses.

STRATEGIES

2. ISSUE: Retirement often has been viewed as an all-or-none phenomenon in the academic nursing community, making an experienced pool of faculty unavailable for continued contributions to the nursing academic unit.
Most nursing faculty members retire between the ages of 61.5 and 63.1 years (AACN, 1993, 1994, 2002b, 2005b). Many faculty approaching retirement would like to continue teaching in some capacity, but may be unable to do because of so because of restrictive university policies and/or retirement plan provisions. Rather than retirement marking the end of professional productivity, as many as half of retiring American academics return to the workforce (Dorfman, 1989). Research (Kelly and Swisher, 1998) has shown that, although retirement often is welcomed by nurses and valued as a time to focus on the self, retirees nevertheless miss professional affiliations and the discipline of going to work. Women seem to have more difficulty retiring than men, and are more reluctant to retire. In fact, work may be more important in the lives of older women than previously recognized in the literature. While retirement is viewed as an attractive option to those whose work roles and environments are perceived as stressful and not enjoyable, many retiring nurses actively seek opportunities to volunteer and otherwise stay busy. These observations have particular implications for the female-dominated nursing profession, especially the subgroup of aging nurse academicians who might remain active if allowed and encouraged to do so.

AACN's 2002 survey of resignations and retirements indicated that of the 161 retirees 10 (6.2%) are continuing to teach on a part-time basis (AACN, 2002b). Some colleges and universities are recognizing the value of retired scholars, and are creating ways to keep them involved in the academic community. For example, Emory University has created an Emeritus College comprised of retired professors across disciplines. They meet for monthly meals and intellectual activities, teach selected classes, and participate in organized programs that keep them active in the lives of students (Fogg, 2003). The University of Southern California's Emeriti Center offers modest research stipends to retired faculty, recognizes them for continuing scholarship, and supports an off-campus lecture series in which they speak at functions in the community.

Retirement policies have been reconsidered at some institutions to allow retired faculty to return to teaching responsibilities. For example, the University of California (including their two schools of nursing at San Francisco and Los Angeles) have a faculty recall policy that allows faculty to collect their full retirement (which may be as high as 100% of their salary depending on years of service) while being paid for additional faculty service in teaching or administration. The policy demands that faculty be retired for a minimum of 30 days and be recalled for 47% time or less. The University of Florida-Gainesville also enables colleges to hire retired faculty members as soon as one month following their retirement date. The retired faculty member is not eligible for benefits, and is restricted in the amount of income that can be earned each year for their services if they are to continue to collect retirement income. Nursing may do well to utilize these and similar ideas to encourage retiring and retired faculty to remain active in the full array of nursing education activities.

STRATEGIES:

3. ISSUE: Nursing clinical education is resource intensive for colleges and universities, but is critically important for the safe teaching of nursing as a practice discipline.
Nursing clinical instruction as practiced today is expensive in that it traditionally has been accomplished in small groups of students with close supervision because the learning experience includes assuming responsibility for direct patient care. In addition, faculty must have education and expertise in the specific specialty area in which they supervise students. Therefore, even schools with small student enrollment require multiple faculty experts to represent applicable specialties and to directly supervise learners as they provide care to human beings.

Nursing educators are becoming increasingly creative in offering high quality clinical experiences to students in the face of decreasing faculty resources. Many schools have developed formal partnerships with clinical facilities to use expert clinicians to teach students and thereby increase faculty capacity. These partnerships have varying characteristics and incentives. Some partnerships yield direct financial benefits to one or both partners, while others have indirect benefits. For example, non-salaried faculty appointments often are offered to agency clinicians who serve as teachers and/or clinical preceptors for students. Individuals selected for these roles enjoy increased professional recognition and other indirect rewards. In return for providing clinical teachers/preceptors, the agency may benefit from faculty services such as teaching or consultation; preferred placement of employees in the academic program; the benefit of collaboration as they seek magnet recognition and similar status from external agencies; and priority in recruiting the school's students upon graduation. These creative and mutually beneficial relationships are time consuming and labor intensive to develop, and require much thought about the benefits to be derived by each partner. However, these types of professional relationships may be a key to future success in nursing clinical education as faculty losses continue.

A large number of AACN member schools have created formal partnerships with their health service colleagues to increase nursing enrollments (undergraduate and graduate) and/or expand faculty capacity. For example, partnerships at the University of New Mexico and University of Iowa derive significant benefits to both partners, and have been highlighted at AACN conferences (AACN, 2002d, 2003c), but other examples abound. Initiatives by the University of Florida, the University of South Florida, and the University of Virginia, among others, specifically increase clinical faculty capacity and improve the learning experience of students (AACN, 2002c, 2003b). The University of California, San Francisco affiliated university medical centers provide three-year scholarships to students in the masters-entry program in nursing if students promise to work full time for one year between achieving their registered nurse license (earned after one year in the program) and returning to school. Students also promise to work at the institution part-time while continuing in the master's program. Loma Linda University's partnering hospital encourages experienced clinicians to supervise students by paying preceptors a slightly higher salary (AACN, 2002c). Numerous nursing schools host programs to benefit the hospital clinicians who supervise students. For example, Emory University hosts an Annual Preceptor Institute to address clinical topics of interest (AACN, 2002c). Carson-Newman College specifically prepares agency preceptors for their critically important role in evaluating students (AACN, 2003a).

Partnerships between clinical facilities and academic programs offer the additional benefit of engaging both partners in discussion about how nursing is practiced in the real world and how it should be taught. Nursing programs consistently have not sought this expert advice from service colleagues. Dr. Tim Porter-O'Grady (2001), who often consults with health care facilities, asserts that nursing is changing quickly from practice-based activities such as "bathing, treating, changing, feeding, intervening, drugging, and discharging" to knowledge-based activities of "accessing, informing, guiding, teaching, counseling, typing, and linking...." (p. 183). Dr. Barbara Mark on the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is engaged in funded research dedicated to redesigning the work of nursing. She states "We need to figure out how to redesign the work of nursing to get maximum efficiency and maximum effectiveness from the nurses we have" rather than simply adding more nurses (Vickers, 2002, p.6). During these times of possibly dramatic transitions in what constitutes nursing, formal collaboration between service and education will better identify emerging clinical issues, analyze actual roles and expectations of practicing nurses, and develop the required nursing curriculum.

In addition to looking internally, nursing may benefit from examining curricular designs, models, and teaching strategies from other health disciplines that offer effective learning and require fewer clinical faculty, such as expanded use of non-faculty clinical preceptors, concentrated clinical experience (e.g., 40 hours/week) late in the program, and increased use of simulations in the clinical laboratory in lieu of patient care assignments. Nursing traditionally has valued and even required one model for teaching: integrated theory and small group, faculty-supervised clinical practice throughout the nursing program. However, little empirical evidence exists to validate these preferred approaches as best practices in nursing clinical education. Nursing must be open to a variety of clinical teaching models that may have a faculty-sparing effect.

STRATEGIES:

4. ISSUE: We have insufficient evidence regarding how to best utilize faculty, and need more educational research.
Nursing has a long, proud tradition of excellence in education, often leading the way for other disciplines. This has never been more apparent than now, when the profession boasts an impressive number and variety of programs and periodicals devoted to nursing education. However, the overall decline in master's enrollments and increased emphasis on clinical specialization at the master's level in the past two decades help explain the lower number of nursing master's students specializing in education. Further, the decline in doctoral graduations, and the relatively small percentage of doctorally prepared nurses who choose an academic career may adversely affect the amount and variety of educational research being conducted. For example, the traditional clinical teaching model of one instructor for a small group of students and specific faculty-to-student ratios (e.g., 1:6; 1:8) mandated in many states developed out of practices deemed suitable at the time, but which may no longer be most appropriate. For the most part, these models and ratios have not been tested.

Faculty often approach didactic and clinical teaching the way they were taught, rather than incorporating new techniques based on educational research findings that may have direct impact on faculty productivity/capacity and optimal student learning. Therefore, we need to establish best practices in nursing education that are based on empirical evidence. Furthermore, with nursing and health care in a state of rapid change and faculty resources rapidly declining, nursing does not have the luxury of approaching teaching with traditional labor-intensive or trial-and-error approaches. We need specific research that validates best teaching practices in order to maximize our teaching resources.

The scholarship of teaching is a recognized part of the full range of scholarship within the discipline of nursing (AACN, 1999c). However, there may be a tendency to place higher value on the scholarship of clinical practice, and the considerable resources of the National Institutes of Health are not available to faculty who want to test innovative educational programs. Therefore, in some instances, faculty who are dedicated to conducting educational research to help develop a science of teaching may struggle for recognition of their work and may have difficulty obtaining funding or promotion.

STRATEGIES:

5. ISSUE: Faculty require professional development, mentoring, and institutional encouragement to master the faculty role and continue in it.
As mentioned in Section 2, the college/university environment is changing in dramatic ways, adapting to the demands of the information age, reexamining what and how students learn, and responding to increasingly varied and demanding learners and new workforce skills (Berberet & McMillin, 2002). This can be positive and exhilarating; one of the most highly valued aspects of the job. The demanding educational environment and the full array of role expectations encourage faculty to embrace a constant state of self-improvement in order to be fully successful.

One of the most crucial expectations of faculty is to understand learning and to apply that knowledge in determining both what to teach and how to teach. Hopefully, most faculty have realized that the current higher education environment is about the learner and learning rather than the teacher and teaching. Educators now are expected to facilitate learning rather than convey vast amounts of content (Porter-O'Grady, 2001; Berberet & McMillin, 2002). In nursing, clinical expertise is essential to professional success, but clinical proficiency alone is not sufficient to convey nursing knowledge and practice to others in a meaningful, useful, appropriate way. Excellent nurses are not necessarily expert teachers. Because of the explosion of information on the art and science of teaching adults, faculty members cannot hope to be completely successful in their teaching without formal mechanisms of professional development. Without this instruction and support, a new faculty member may receive negative student evaluations, become frustrated with the faculty role, and seek other employment opportunities.

Even experienced faculty can benefit from regular faculty development, particularly as new educational research and strategies are introduced that can improve their teaching. Doctoral programs in nursing may wish to add required education content and/or mentoring opportunities to familiarize all students with the academic role.

Strong orientation programs and ongoing faculty development opportunities are pivotal to keeping all faculty informed and confident about the teaching aspect of their role. These activities may occur in individual classes, formal courses, or independent activities. They may consist of informal peer mentoring such as the program used successfully in academic medicine (Pololi, Knight, Dennis, & Frankel, 2002), or it may be an intangible element that is nurtured in a community of teachers seeking to improve their expertise (Diekelman, 2002). They may be based on interdisciplinary national initiatives such as the Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (CASTL) Higher Education Program (Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 2003) and the Preparing Future Faculty Program (Preparing Future Faculty National Office, 2003). Emory University's Clinical Teaching Institute has the goal of increased teaching competenc