Education

Education Quality in Doctoral Education calls for quality for the wrong reasons: the sense of threat to those who have programs by those who would have them; opportunity for exploitation of nursing within and without the profession and the misuse of power; abrogation of responsibility by commissions and state-wide committees for highereducation planning that are loath to choose among proposals from competing universities in their state, instead attempting to hide behind "moratorium" and "quality" issues so as to avoid making a locally unpopular decision; and the desire of accrediting agencies to stretch their nets wider. There are also calls for quality for the correct reasons: consideration of academic integrity, context, and heritage; deans and nurse educators knowledgeably articulating the real issues related to doctoral programs in nursing to the larger academic community; institutional responsibility and accountability; selfdetermination and autonomy of institutions of higher education, with the responsible weighing of the attending risks and rewards; and demonstrated need and explication of resources. AACN and the Division of Nursing have demonstrated admirable leadership in posing the relevant issues. Discussion should be expanded to those who have delayed starting a doctoral program, those who have decided against starting a doctoral program, and those would-be faculty members and students who are affected by decisions made in the name of quality control.

Faced with a doctoral program "growing under every academic bush" the question of quality control is real. However, it is a question with more than one answer. This question was a part of the conference sponsored by the Division of Nursing and the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN), cub minating in the report, "Doctoral Programs in Nursing: Consensus for Quality;' presented in this issue. The question of quality control is also an aspect of S.R.E.B.'s interim report "Planning for Doctoral Nursing Education in the South" and its subsequent data gathering On the subject. This report, which was not written by a nurse educator,.discourages universities contemplating or in the process of developing doctoral programs in nursing. A moritorium on new programs is one method of approaching quality control, though it does not address aspects of quality control for existing programs. Existing programs are accountable for such aspects as the quality of the credentials of faculty members, ability and experience of students, curriculum, research record, research productivity, and quality of the research product. Where are the checks and balances that will enhance quality in teaching, dissertation direction, and faculty:student ratio? Application of an accreditation mentality as we know it in graduate and undergraduate professional programs would be unfortunate. More arresting are the questions: Who shall decide if there will be new programs? How will quality evidence itself?. How will quality be monitored? One may well question the motivation for control. There are

LAURELARCHERCOPP, PHD, FAAN

Dean and Professor School of Nursing University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill, North Carolina

69