Alignment of Athletic Training Doctoral Education and Faculty Workload

• Published in: Athletic training education journal 2018-07, Vol.13 (3), p.268-280
• Main Authors: Nottingham, Sara L, Mazerolle, Stephanie M, Bowman, Thomas G, Coleman, Kelly A
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Athletics; Career Choice; College Faculty; Doctoral Programs; Education Work Relationship; Faculty Workload; Higher Education; Institutional Characteristics; Phenomenology; Socialization; Teacher Attitudes; Time Management; Training
• ISSN: 1947-380X; 1947-380X
• DOI: 10.4085/1303268

Context: Evidence suggests that doctoral education is incongruent with faculty positions, but this has yet to be specifically examined in athletic training. Objective: To gain understanding of the alignment of doctoral education and faculty workload, including institutional characteristics, from the perspectives of junior faculty members. Design: Qualitative, phenomenological research. Setting: Higher education institutions with Commission on Accreditation of Athletic Training Education--accredited programs. Patients or Other Participants: Twenty athletic training faculty members (14 women and 6 men) who were 32 ± 3 years of age and averaged 10 ± 4 years of experience as athletic trainers and 2 ± 2 years as a full-time faculty member. Main Outcome Measure(s): We developed, peer-reviewed, and piloted 2 semistructured interview guides to obtain participants' perspectives on their doctoral preparation, entrance into higher education, and faculty workload. We completed telephone interviews with each participant over the course of 4 months. Transcribed interviews were analyzed by 2 investigators using a phenomenological approach, then reviewed by 2 additional qualitative researchers. Mechanisms of trustworthiness included member-checking, multianalyst triangulation, and peer review. Results: Two themes emerged from this study: (1) workload and (2) congruency. Faculty workload was dominated by teaching, but faculty had several demands on their time, including administration, service, and research. Most faculty positions focused on teaching, whereas their doctoral education was more focused on research, possibly because of a lack of congruency between doctoral education and faculty position institution types. Although mismatches occurred between doctoral education and faculty workload, participants were often aware of these differences and selected faculty positions aligned with their career goals. Conclusions: Faculty workload is generally teaching-focused and contains additional demands that are often not included in doctoral education programs. Doctoral advisers should promote adequate socialization to these characteristics of faculty positions, and doctoral students should consider their interests and faculty workload when searching for faculty positions.