- Email: [email protected]
Faculty Practice: Is It Scholarly Activity?
FACULTY PRACTICE: IS IT SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY? CAREY BOSOLD, MSN, FNP-BC, CNE⁎
AND
MELISSA DARNELL, MSN, FNP-BC, CNE†
“Nursing is a science that is applied in practice and is deeply rooted in a fundamental commitment to meeting the health needs of people regardless of their life circumstances” (J. Edwards, 2002). How can the role of nursing educator be any different? New requirements from accrediting bodies, state nursing boards, and other authorities ensure we are meeting the needs of this generation of nursing students. How then do we protect our professional practice within the demands of the university? To answer this question, we will examine the available literature as it relates to nursing, education, professional practice, scholarship, and faculty evaluation. Implications for the nursing profession and education include defining faculty practice within the mission of the university, enhancing the working relationship between schools of nursing and clinical sites, and developing faculty practice guidelines with a clear definition of scholarship. The definition of scholarship that we recommend that meets the needs of practice disciplines is the definition of scholarship by Ernest Boyer (1990), specifically the scholarship of application. As defined by Boyer, the scholarship of application “…is one that both applies and contributes to human knowledge” (p. 23). (Index words: Scholarship; Professional practice; Academia; Faculty evaluation; Nursing education) J Prof Nurs 28:90–95, 2012. © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
T
HE ROLE OF the nurse educator can safely be described as “evolving.” Nursing, as a profession, demands competence and the commitment to acquiring new information. This does not change when the professional nurse takes on the role of nurse educator. How did practice become lost in nursing education? Formal nursing education was first established in the United States over 100 years ago. At that time, the practicing nurse served as the nurse educator. However, in the 1940s, around the time of World War II, nursing education began to shift from the hospital setting to the academic setting. Faculty were removed physically from the practice setting with the growth of baccalaureate programs across the nation. The separation between academia and practice had begun. Faculty were forced to focus on achieving acceptance and respect in academia, which resulted in less time to focus on the practice aspect of the profession (Newland & Truglio-Londrigan, 2003). Tenured or tenure-track faculty have found themselves
∗Assistant Professor of Nursing, Department of Nursing Dean Hall 218-A, Russellville, AR. †Assistant Professor of Nursing, Department of Nursing Dean Hall 217, Russellville, AR. Address correspondence to Bosold: Department of Nursing, Arkansas Tech University, 402 West O Street, Dean Hall 218-A, Russellville, AR 72801. E-mail: [email protected] 8755-7223/11/$ - see front matter 90 doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2011.11.003
in an environment where they are forced to meet the demands of the university, “…furthering academic competencies in research and other scholarly undertakings, rather than clinical practice competencies” (Little & Milliken, 2007, p. 7). The American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN, 1999) recognized this struggle when they published their position statement titled Position Statement on Defining Scholarship for the Discipline of Nursing. AACN stated “Nursing faculty, like others whose disciplines brings together scientific investigation and application through professional services, often function in a system designed to regard and promote a narrow definition of academic success” (p. 1). Nursing is a practice profession that is directed by outcomes, and nurse educators can shape both research and practice through excellent teaching (Newland & Truglio-Londrigan, 2003). The concept of professionalism is covered throughout the nursing curricula; however, professional behavior begins with practice (Blair, Dennehy, & White, 2005). Remaining current with health care trends can be difficult when a faculty commitment does not allow time for clinical practice or provide an opportunity to practice within a specialty (Sawyer, Alexander, Gordon, Juszczak, & Gilliss, 2000). Because of the tradition of the triad reward method (teaching, scholarship, and service), faculty face a dilemma of how to meet their professional practice expectations while fulfilling the traditional academic
Journal of Professional Nursing, Vol 28, No. 2 (March–April), 2012: pp 90–95 © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY
91
components of scholarship (National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties, 2005). The vague definitions and varied uses of the terms scholarly activity, scholarship, and scholarly teaching have led to confusion, frustration, and lack of direction within the tenure and promotion process. How then does the “evolving” role of the nurse educator fare in the traditional university setting? How can practice not be recognized or rewarded for those who teach in a practice profession? As a nurse educator and advanced practice nurse, the argument is made that professional practice is important for development of the faculty, credibility with the student, progress for the university, and betterment of the community. Faculty practice should be rewarded as applied scholarship as defined by Boyer (1990), and the university definition of scholarly activity should be reexamined and scholarship redefined to support nurse educators and other faculty in practice-based disciplines (Sorcinelli, 2002).
Background The topic of scholarship can engender strong opinions and often evokes emotional responses. Change champions must recognize that some faculty members perceive change in the traditional concept of scholarship as an attack on their personal and professional value systems (Harris, DaRosa, Phillip, & Hash, 2003). The argument is made that nursing education is now part of the academic community and faculty must adhere to the same standards or expectations for scholarship as every other discipline on campus (Tolve, 1999). The very idea of adopting a broader view of scholarship in terms of tenure and promotion is concerning for faculty who have been successful with “scholarship equals published research” (Diamond, 2002). Lack of prestige, image among peers, reduced funding are all concerns for administrations and faculty when considering the adoption of a broader definition of scholarship on campus (Diamond, 2002). At our own university, examples of scholarly/creative activity include original research, creative production and theory/method development, integrated scholarship, preparation of grant proposals, development of courses, continuing education, conducting workshops, supervision of graduate and undergraduate research projects, and completion of a terminal degree (Arkansas Tech University, 2008–2009 Faculty Handbook). Professional practice is not recognized nor rewarded in the current method of evaluation for tenure and promotion. A lack of understanding concerning job descriptions and professional responsibilities from one discipline to another across campus could be an important factor to consider when a university committee makes evaluative recommendations as opposed to having committees for promotion and tenure consideration within a department or discipline. There are other definitions of scholarship within academic settings that establish additional opportunities to fulfill the scholarship requirements for faculty members from various disciplines. For example, scholarship has been defined as “the application of systematic
approaches to the acquisition of knowledge through intellectual inquiry. Scholarship includes the dissemination of this knowledge through various means such as publications, presentations (verbal and audiovisual), professional practice and the application of this knowledge to the enrichment of the life of society” (Dalhousie University, 1993). In addition, other universities within our state have successfully defined scholarship for promotion and tenure consideration to encompass areas of research or practice, but not necessarily both, within a health care discipline. The goal of this specific scholarship definition enables the faculty and the university to promote the health of the public and advance the science and practice of that discipline. (Fay. W. Boozman College of Public Health University, 2007). Furthermore, our university is accredited by The Higher Learning Commission (2005), which demands that particular criteria be met by supporting evidence at the university level. More specifically, Criterion 4 (Version 1:10/03), the acquisition, discovery, and application of knowledge, suggests that the organization should “…promote a life of learning for its faculty, administration, staff, and students by fostering and supporting inquiry, creativity, practice, and social responsibility in ways consistent with its mission” (pp. 3.2–12). The Commission recognizes scholarship as both research and practice as appropriate to the discipline or field. This statement supports the idea that scholarship should be defined by the individual discipline. What is scholarly activity for one discipline may not be scholarly activity for another. This criterion also includes the importance of an organization publicly acknowledging the achievements of students and faculty in acquiring, discovering, and applying knowledge. This practice demonstrates the linkages between curricular and cocurricular activities that support inquiry, practice, creativity, and social responsibility. Boyer (1990), in his landmark publication entitled Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate, proposed a revision of the definition of scholarship across university campuses to include a paradigm of scholarship with four interlocking parts: the scholarship of discovery, the scholarship of integration, the scholarship of application, and the scholarship of teaching. Although Boyer stressed the importance of research, “research is a central ingredient of the academic life, and sustaining this creative process within the academy itself is absolutely crucial if scholarship is to be vigorously advanced” (Boyer, 1992, p. 89), he suggested that the narrow definition offered at the university level did not allow faculty to move outside the walls of the university to connect their role as educator to their professional practice. The AACN (1999) recommended Boyer's definition of scholarship as the scholarship of discovery, teaching, application and integration. “These four aspects of scholarship are salient to academic nursing, where each specified area supports the values of a profession committed to both social relevance and scientific advancement” (p. 1). AACN goes on to address the scholarship of application as practice and
92
BOSOLD AND DARNELL
provide specific components including development of clinical knowledge, professional development, application of technical or research skills, and service “…where scholarship is directly related to the clinical specialty of the faculty member and flows directly from professional activity…” (p. 3).
community-based intellectual work in a way that counts at tenure time” (Cantor, 2005, p. 37). Now is the time for nurse educators to protect their professional practice, and this starts with a careful review of the mission of the university, the tenure and promotion system, and the university definition of scholarship.
Barriers to Faculty Practice
Faculty Practice
However important we think faculty practice is to the discipline of nursing; barriers to successful practice exist and are plentiful in the literature. To simplify the discussion, the identified barriers are grouped into three main categories:
Faculty practice is not viewed as a legitimate component of scholarship (Tolve, 1999); however, it has become an integral component, if not requirement, of faculty role expectation at many schools of nursing. Remaining current within the nursing profession can be difficult when a faculty commitment does not allow time or opportunity for clinical practice (Sawyer et al., 2000). Bringing faculty evaluation systems into line with current realities has become a priority nationwide (Huber, 2002). However, the demands of the university and the demands of the profession remain imbalanced and unclear. The lack of understanding of faculty employment requirements across campus can lead to further confusion. Often, meeting the demands of certifying bodies alone can drain faculty time and resources. The American Nurses Credentialing Center and the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners requires 1,000 hours of practice every 5 years for recertification as an advanced practice nurse, along with 150 hours of continuing education (American Nurse Credentialing Center, 2008). The AACN (1999) views professional practice as critical to remain competent within the nursing profession. The National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties considers faculty practice to be essential for nursing faculty, especially if they are teaching in a clinical course (National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties, 2005). The National League of Nursing Accrediting Agency (2006) endorsed Boyer's definition of scholarship; “these four aspects of scholarship are salient to academic nursing, where each specific area supports the values of a profession committed to both social relevance an scientific advancement” (National League of Nursing Accrediting Agency, 2006, p. 80). Faculties provide many reasons for choosing not to practice. In fulfilling the roles of educator, scholar, and clinician, faculty often feel strained. Although teaching and student advisement remain the most important responsibility, faculty are often overwhelmed with the continued demands of the university while trying to meet the demands of the profession (Newland & TruglioLondrigan, 2003, Tolve, 1999). Most faculty are in agreement that clinical practice is an integral part of their role as educators. How can one teach what one does not practice? How can practice not be a requirement of those who teach in a practice profession? Where are students to find their role models if not in their teachers? Where is the content for nursing curricula generated if not from practice? (Newland & TruglioLondrigan, 2003). Five main domains benefiting from faculty practice identified through a review of the literature include the students, the university, the community,
1. Narrow definition of scholarship on university
and college campus. 2. Lack of recognition of professional practice
within the traditional triad reward system of teaching, scholarship, and service. 3. Blending of the roles of professional nurse and educator, including the growing university demand s on the nurse educator. The definition of scholarship used by most institutional reward systems to evaluate faculty work is very narrow, referring mostly to basic or theoretical research published in peer-reviewed journals (Boyer, 1990; Hofmeyer, Newton, & Scott, 2007; O'Meara, 2006). The very idea of defining scholarship as research is part of university tradition, which in a tradition-bound setting, the very idea of change can be very unpopular (Kirwin, 2005). However, the current view of “scholarship equals research” fails to meet the full expectations of the community for which the university is said to serve (Hofmeyer et al., 2007), as well as the faculty who may or may not excel in published research. A more integrated approach to scholarship values differences and promotes a way of working that blends the dual role of nurse educator and practicing nurse (Andrew & Wilkie, 2007). In most academic institutions, research, teaching, and service are the primary components of scholarship, and the basis of university merit reviews, promotion, and tenure decisions. The definition of scholarship gains specific meaning when an individual case is evaluated and ruled upon by the promotion and tenure committee (Huber, 2002). Research and publication generally receive significantly more weight in these decisions than either teaching or service (Tolve, 1999). Within this traditional model, nursing faculty, particularly nurse practitioner faculty, face a dilemma of how to meet their professional practice expectations while fulfilling the traditional academic components of scholarship. When scholarship is narrowly defined as peer review research, faculty who excel in teaching, application, and integrated forms of scholarly activity suffer (Hofmeyer et al., 2007). “The current tenure and promotion system exacts a high price. It is costly to communities, which aren't getting access to educational partners; to students, who do not have opportunities for significant public work through the curriculum; and to faculty scholars, who can't claim
SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY
93
the nursing discipline, and the faculty themselves. Many nurse educators are offered their first teaching job because of their clinical knowledge and skills, with the expectation that these qualities make them good role models for students. The ability to introduce theoretical concepts by illustrating them with real stories of patients and situations that reflect current clinical experiences can change what students may interpret as ideology into lasting impressions (Little & Milliken, 2007). This scenario provides unparalleled opportunities for teaching about the essentials of nursing practice while faculty establish important credibility in the eyes of the students, inspiring them to a higher level of nursing practice. Maintaining competency is essential for role modeling and mentoring (National League of Nursing, 2005). In addition, faculty practice can provide increased sites for students' clinical rotations. This arrangement not only benefits the students but also provides control over the learning activities and the quality of care provided (Dracup, 2004; Tolve, 1999). The nursing discipline also benefits from faculty practice. This unique situation promotes communication and collaboration between practice, education, and other disciplines closing the practice–theory gap. It also offers a rich environment for observing these gaps to further study quality patient care. These research opportunities can help implement best practices based on outcomes, creating a living laboratory for evidenced-based practice (Becker et al., 2007; Dracup, 2004; Tolve, 1999). The university and the community can also benefit from faculty practice. Nursing faculty are generally highly visible within the community, and faculty who choose to practice are well positioned to become leaders with the community, embodying the values of the university (Dracup, 2004). Faculty practice can also provide potential revenue opportunities through community- and/or university-based clinics. This model of practice has proven profitable while also providing a very valuable service to the community and the student population (Becker et al., 2007). Finally, faculty practice allows nurse educators to stay current within the rapidly changing health care systems of today. This connection with reality provides the opportunity for faculty to transfer their knowledge to the nursing curriculum and possibly alter teaching strategies within the nursing programs (Tolve,1999). Furthermore, faculty practice exemplifies professionalism by role modeling service to others, displaying autonomy, and promoting self-regulation (Blair et al., 2005). However, the overall goal of faculty practice is to improve the standard of patient care (Newland & Truglio-Londrigan, 2003). Faculty practice brings teaching, research, and service together within our academic setting in ways that will benefit students, the public, and the profession. (Edwards, 2002).
Research In 1999, a survey, conducted by Tolve, was distributed among nursing deans and faculty in colleges and universities across the United States who offer baccalau-
reate and/or higher degree programs in nursing to explore the concept of scholarship and faculty practice (Tolve, 1999). Scholarship was defined as the generation, application, dissemination, and advancement of nursing knowledge in a variety of roles and settings. Faculty respondents stressed that nursing is a practice discipline with knowledge gained by application. Deans and faculty described the components of scholarship as research and publication, teaching, service, faculty practice, and presentations, with research and publication being most valued in promotion and tenure process. Respondents to the survey agreed that nursing faculty face role conflict and fragmentation, and faculty do not believe it is humanly possible to achieve a successful balance. The suggestion was an approach in which teaching and service are considered to be the two essential components of scholarship for faculty, with a choice being made as to whether the faculty member would then develop expertise in research and publication or faculty practice. O'Meara (2006) distributed a survey to chief academic officers' of 4-year institutions concerning the process of tenure and promotion on their campus. Sixty-eight percent of the respondents reported that their institutions had made formal changes to their reward system over the last 10 years to encourage multiple forms of scholarship, whereas 32% reported their institution had not. The most popular formal policy changes were expanding the definition of scholarship used in faculty evaluation policies (76%). Results from this survey suggest that institutions of higher learning can gain a competitive advantage by establishing a reward system that honors multiple forms of scholarship. In addition, these institutions were significantly more likely than their counterparts to report an increase in faculty involvement in the “scholarship of application, the scholarship of teaching and learning, and the scholarship of integration” and an increased “overall satisfaction with roles and rewards” (p. 49).
Organizational Framework Paskiewicz (2003) developed the Organizational Framework of Faculty Role (Figure 1) to emphasize her clinical practice in her promotion and tenure materials. This organizational framework offered the author an opportunity to reflect on her strengths and weakness in the areas of research, teaching, and service as she prepared for the critical review of her work for tenure. The author placed clinical practice in the center of the framework as it informed all areas of the faculty role. It is connected to the traditional expectation of faculty work: research, teaching, and service. Professional development was included by the author to signify the connection of clinical practice, scholarship, and teaching and because it is a part of the faculty evaluation at the authors institution. The inner structure was surrounded by two rings that represent additional factors that influence the faculty members journey to tenure and promotion with the inner ring signifying the administrative role in the process of tenure and promotion and the outer ring
94
BOSOLD AND DARNELL
Figure 1. Organizational framework of faculty role. Reprinted with author's permission (Paskiewicz, 2003).
representing the mission of the university. The author did use the definition of scholarship as proposed by Boyer (1990), with the scholarship of application emphasized as the direct patient-centered activities that are the center of the discipline of nursing. (Paskiewicz, 2003).
Conclusion Ultimately, the public is better served when those teaching our next generation of nurses have the skills and knowledge to model relevant and competent clinical nursing practice. Nurse educators who are able to “practice what they preach” are regarded as credible leaders, inspirational mentors, and understanding colleagues (Little & Milliken, 2007). Currently, nursing faculty are expected to meet two differing sets of expectations: one outlined in their institution's formal promotion and tenure policies and the other implicit and mandated by their profession (Tolve, 1999). “If dedicated time for scholarship is not provided with an infrastructure to support and formalize this, faculty engaged in direct and indirect care of patients will remain at the lower academic ranks with less opportunity for promotion” (Becker et al, 2007). The question no longer is whether faculty practice is essential, but rather how can faculty practice be integrated within the institutions present mission, vision, and cultural values? (Newland & Truglio-Londrigan, 2003). Career flexibility including practice and research opportunities for tenured and tenure-track faculty is a necessity to ensure that today's faculty are able to prepare for annual evaluation and the promotion and tenure process (Kirwin, 2005). Nursing programs are challenged with developing faculty practice arrangements that enhance curricula and provide clinical opportunities for students and opportunities for scholarly clinical practice by the faculty while offering financial support for these valuable experiences (Newland & Truglio-Londrigan, 2003). Consequently, how do we establish the critical connection between the academic triad model and nursing
practice so that we as a profession can demonstrate the high standards of care and the excellence of academia? Individual academic disciplines can be given the responsibility of determining if a specific activity meets the criteria for achieving scholarship goals identified by the department that respects the priorities of the institution, the school, and the discipline. This proposed system is equitable, and the established criteria could be clearly understood by the departmental review committees. This would ensure that no one discipline or group of disciplines would determine what scholarship should be for another discipline. This model would also prove rewarding and cost-effective, in that faculty members being reviewed for promotion or tenure know what is required of them and faculty members serving on review committees can focus their attention on the quality of the portfolio and process rather than on whether the activity should be considered scholarly (Diamond, 2002, p. 77). Finally, if we do not concentrate on attracting and retaining greater numbers of highly qualified professionals within a practice discipline to join us in the academic setting, we simply will be unable to accommodate the growing student population in nursing. We will be forced to limit class size or compromise the quality of education we can provide (Kirwin, 2005). “Diversity and excellence go hand in hand, so we must be vigilant in creating environments that welcome and nurture diverse and excellent people and ideas” (Cantor, 2005). Professional practice that should be regarded as scholarly activity within a nursing paradigm has recently been brought before the faculty senate committee here at Arkansas Tech University. After a lengthy discussion from all represented disciplines on our campus, a decision was made to include an additional opportunity to satisfy the criteria for scholarly or creative activity related to the university's tenure and promotion process to include “professional practices to obtain/maintain state or nationally recognized certifications/licensures” (ATU Faculty Handbook, 2011, p. 27). The ultimate goal of this addendum is to allow all practice disciplines on our campus to better connect their role as educator to their professional practice as suggested by Boyer while also fulfilling the obligations for scholarship necessary for the university's tenure and promotion process.
References Andrew, N., & Wilkie, G. (2007). Integrated scholarship in nursing: An individual responsibility or collective undertaking. Nurse Education Today, 27, 1–4. Arkansas Tech University. (2008/2009). Faculty evaluation, promotion, and tenure policies and procedures. Faculty handbook: Arkansas Tech University. Available at www.atu.edu. Arkansas Tech University. (2011/2012). Faculty evaluation, promotion, and tenure policies and procedures. Faculty Handbook: Arkansas Tech University. Available at http://www. atu.edu/academics/facultyhandbook.shtml. American Nurses Credentialing Center. (2008). Retrieved April 10, 2008, from http://www.nursecredentialing.org/cert/ eligibility.html.
SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY
American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (1999). Position statement on defining scholarship for the discipline of nursing. Retrieved January 18, 2008, from http://www.aacn. nche.edu/publications/positions/scholar.htm. Becker, K. L., Dang, D., Jordon, E., Kub, J., Wlech, A., Smith, C., et al. (2007). An evaluation framework for faculty practice. Nursing outlook, 55, 44–54. Blair, K., Dennehy, P., & White, P. (2005). Nurse practitioner faculty practice: An expectation of professionalism. National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties. Retrieved January 21, 2008, from http://www.nonpf.org/FPStatement2005Final.pdf. Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Boyer, E. (1992). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Issues in Accounting Education, 92, 87–91. Cantor, N. (2005). Tenure-track faculty careers. The Presidency, 8, 35–37. Dalhousie University. (1993). Retrieved January 18, 2008, from http://healthprofessions.dal.ca/Files/ScholarshipDefinition.pdf. Diamond, R. (2002). Defining scholarship for the twenty-first century. Dew Directions for Teaching and Learning, 90, 73–79. Dracup, K. (2004). Impact of faculty practice on an academic institution's mission and vision. Nursing Outlook, 52, 174–178. Edwards, J. (2002). Faculty practice and health policy: Implications for leaders in nursing education. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 26, 62–71. Fay W. Boozman College of Public Health University of Arkansas for Medical Science, W. (2007). Guidelines: Application for promotion and tenure. Retrieved January 21, 2008, from http://depts.washington.edu/ccph/pdf_files/UAMS.pdf. Harris, D., DaRosa, D., Phillip, L., & Hash, R. (2003). Facilitating academic institutional change: Redefining scholarship. Family Medicine, 35, 187–194. Hofmeyer, A., Newton, M., & Scott, C. (2007). Valuing the scholarship of integration and the scholarship of application in the academy for health sciences scholars: Recommended methods. Health Policy and Research Systems, 5, 5. Retrieved January 18, 2008, from http://www.health-policy-systems.com/content/5/1/5.
95
Huber, M. (2002). Faculty evaluation and the development of academic careers. New Directions for Institutional Research, 114, 83. Kirwin, W. (2005). The time for change is now. The Presidency, 8, 34–36. Little, M. A., & Milliken, P. J. (2007). Practicing what we preach: Balancing teaching and clinical practice competencies. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 4, 1 Article 6. National League of Nursing. (2006). NLNAC Accreditation Manual and Interpretive Guidelines. Retrieved January 18, 2008, from http://www.nlnac.org/manuals/NLNACManual2006.pdf. National League of Nursing. (2005). Core competencies of nurse educators with task statements. Retrieved January 18, 2008, from http://www.nln.org/facultydevelopment/pdf/ corecompetencies.pdf. National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties. (2005). Retrieved January 18, 2008, from http://www.nonpf. org/fppromten.htm. Newland, J., & Truglio-Londrigan, M. (2003). Faculty practice: Facilitation of clinical integrations into the academic triad model. Journal of Professional Nursing, 19, 269–278. Paskiewicz, L. (2003). Clinical practice: An emphasis strategy for promotion and tenure. Nursing Forum, 38, 21–26. O'Meara, K. (2006). Encouraging multiple forms of scholarship in faculty reward systems: Influence on faculty work life. Planning Higher Education, 34, 43–53. Sorcinelli, M. (2002). New conceptions of scholarship for a new generation of faculty members. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 90, 41–48. The Higher Learning Commission. (2003). Handbook of Accreditation. (pp. 3.1–5). Retrieved from www.ncahigher learningcommission.org. Tolve, C. (1999). Nursing scholarship: Role of faculty practice. Clinical Excellence for Nurse Practitioners, 3, 28–33. Sawyer, M., Alexander, I., Gordon, L., Juszczak, L., & Gilliss, C. (2000). A critical review of current nursing faculty practice. Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners, 12, 511–516.
AND
MELISSA DARNELL, MSN, FNP-BC, CNE†
“Nursing is a science that is applied in practice and is deeply rooted in a fundamental commitment to meeting the health needs of people regardless of their life circumstances” (J. Edwards, 2002). How can the role of nursing educator be any different? New requirements from accrediting bodies, state nursing boards, and other authorities ensure we are meeting the needs of this generation of nursing students. How then do we protect our professional practice within the demands of the university? To answer this question, we will examine the available literature as it relates to nursing, education, professional practice, scholarship, and faculty evaluation. Implications for the nursing profession and education include defining faculty practice within the mission of the university, enhancing the working relationship between schools of nursing and clinical sites, and developing faculty practice guidelines with a clear definition of scholarship. The definition of scholarship that we recommend that meets the needs of practice disciplines is the definition of scholarship by Ernest Boyer (1990), specifically the scholarship of application. As defined by Boyer, the scholarship of application “…is one that both applies and contributes to human knowledge” (p. 23). (Index words: Scholarship; Professional practice; Academia; Faculty evaluation; Nursing education) J Prof Nurs 28:90–95, 2012. © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
T
HE ROLE OF the nurse educator can safely be described as “evolving.” Nursing, as a profession, demands competence and the commitment to acquiring new information. This does not change when the professional nurse takes on the role of nurse educator. How did practice become lost in nursing education? Formal nursing education was first established in the United States over 100 years ago. At that time, the practicing nurse served as the nurse educator. However, in the 1940s, around the time of World War II, nursing education began to shift from the hospital setting to the academic setting. Faculty were removed physically from the practice setting with the growth of baccalaureate programs across the nation. The separation between academia and practice had begun. Faculty were forced to focus on achieving acceptance and respect in academia, which resulted in less time to focus on the practice aspect of the profession (Newland & Truglio-Londrigan, 2003). Tenured or tenure-track faculty have found themselves
∗Assistant Professor of Nursing, Department of Nursing Dean Hall 218-A, Russellville, AR. †Assistant Professor of Nursing, Department of Nursing Dean Hall 217, Russellville, AR. Address correspondence to Bosold: Department of Nursing, Arkansas Tech University, 402 West O Street, Dean Hall 218-A, Russellville, AR 72801. E-mail: [email protected] 8755-7223/11/$ - see front matter 90 doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2011.11.003
in an environment where they are forced to meet the demands of the university, “…furthering academic competencies in research and other scholarly undertakings, rather than clinical practice competencies” (Little & Milliken, 2007, p. 7). The American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN, 1999) recognized this struggle when they published their position statement titled Position Statement on Defining Scholarship for the Discipline of Nursing. AACN stated “Nursing faculty, like others whose disciplines brings together scientific investigation and application through professional services, often function in a system designed to regard and promote a narrow definition of academic success” (p. 1). Nursing is a practice profession that is directed by outcomes, and nurse educators can shape both research and practice through excellent teaching (Newland & Truglio-Londrigan, 2003). The concept of professionalism is covered throughout the nursing curricula; however, professional behavior begins with practice (Blair, Dennehy, & White, 2005). Remaining current with health care trends can be difficult when a faculty commitment does not allow time for clinical practice or provide an opportunity to practice within a specialty (Sawyer, Alexander, Gordon, Juszczak, & Gilliss, 2000). Because of the tradition of the triad reward method (teaching, scholarship, and service), faculty face a dilemma of how to meet their professional practice expectations while fulfilling the traditional academic
Journal of Professional Nursing, Vol 28, No. 2 (March–April), 2012: pp 90–95 © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY
91
components of scholarship (National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties, 2005). The vague definitions and varied uses of the terms scholarly activity, scholarship, and scholarly teaching have led to confusion, frustration, and lack of direction within the tenure and promotion process. How then does the “evolving” role of the nurse educator fare in the traditional university setting? How can practice not be recognized or rewarded for those who teach in a practice profession? As a nurse educator and advanced practice nurse, the argument is made that professional practice is important for development of the faculty, credibility with the student, progress for the university, and betterment of the community. Faculty practice should be rewarded as applied scholarship as defined by Boyer (1990), and the university definition of scholarly activity should be reexamined and scholarship redefined to support nurse educators and other faculty in practice-based disciplines (Sorcinelli, 2002).
Background The topic of scholarship can engender strong opinions and often evokes emotional responses. Change champions must recognize that some faculty members perceive change in the traditional concept of scholarship as an attack on their personal and professional value systems (Harris, DaRosa, Phillip, & Hash, 2003). The argument is made that nursing education is now part of the academic community and faculty must adhere to the same standards or expectations for scholarship as every other discipline on campus (Tolve, 1999). The very idea of adopting a broader view of scholarship in terms of tenure and promotion is concerning for faculty who have been successful with “scholarship equals published research” (Diamond, 2002). Lack of prestige, image among peers, reduced funding are all concerns for administrations and faculty when considering the adoption of a broader definition of scholarship on campus (Diamond, 2002). At our own university, examples of scholarly/creative activity include original research, creative production and theory/method development, integrated scholarship, preparation of grant proposals, development of courses, continuing education, conducting workshops, supervision of graduate and undergraduate research projects, and completion of a terminal degree (Arkansas Tech University, 2008–2009 Faculty Handbook). Professional practice is not recognized nor rewarded in the current method of evaluation for tenure and promotion. A lack of understanding concerning job descriptions and professional responsibilities from one discipline to another across campus could be an important factor to consider when a university committee makes evaluative recommendations as opposed to having committees for promotion and tenure consideration within a department or discipline. There are other definitions of scholarship within academic settings that establish additional opportunities to fulfill the scholarship requirements for faculty members from various disciplines. For example, scholarship has been defined as “the application of systematic
approaches to the acquisition of knowledge through intellectual inquiry. Scholarship includes the dissemination of this knowledge through various means such as publications, presentations (verbal and audiovisual), professional practice and the application of this knowledge to the enrichment of the life of society” (Dalhousie University, 1993). In addition, other universities within our state have successfully defined scholarship for promotion and tenure consideration to encompass areas of research or practice, but not necessarily both, within a health care discipline. The goal of this specific scholarship definition enables the faculty and the university to promote the health of the public and advance the science and practice of that discipline. (Fay. W. Boozman College of Public Health University, 2007). Furthermore, our university is accredited by The Higher Learning Commission (2005), which demands that particular criteria be met by supporting evidence at the university level. More specifically, Criterion 4 (Version 1:10/03), the acquisition, discovery, and application of knowledge, suggests that the organization should “…promote a life of learning for its faculty, administration, staff, and students by fostering and supporting inquiry, creativity, practice, and social responsibility in ways consistent with its mission” (pp. 3.2–12). The Commission recognizes scholarship as both research and practice as appropriate to the discipline or field. This statement supports the idea that scholarship should be defined by the individual discipline. What is scholarly activity for one discipline may not be scholarly activity for another. This criterion also includes the importance of an organization publicly acknowledging the achievements of students and faculty in acquiring, discovering, and applying knowledge. This practice demonstrates the linkages between curricular and cocurricular activities that support inquiry, practice, creativity, and social responsibility. Boyer (1990), in his landmark publication entitled Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate, proposed a revision of the definition of scholarship across university campuses to include a paradigm of scholarship with four interlocking parts: the scholarship of discovery, the scholarship of integration, the scholarship of application, and the scholarship of teaching. Although Boyer stressed the importance of research, “research is a central ingredient of the academic life, and sustaining this creative process within the academy itself is absolutely crucial if scholarship is to be vigorously advanced” (Boyer, 1992, p. 89), he suggested that the narrow definition offered at the university level did not allow faculty to move outside the walls of the university to connect their role as educator to their professional practice. The AACN (1999) recommended Boyer's definition of scholarship as the scholarship of discovery, teaching, application and integration. “These four aspects of scholarship are salient to academic nursing, where each specified area supports the values of a profession committed to both social relevance and scientific advancement” (p. 1). AACN goes on to address the scholarship of application as practice and
92
BOSOLD AND DARNELL
provide specific components including development of clinical knowledge, professional development, application of technical or research skills, and service “…where scholarship is directly related to the clinical specialty of the faculty member and flows directly from professional activity…” (p. 3).
community-based intellectual work in a way that counts at tenure time” (Cantor, 2005, p. 37). Now is the time for nurse educators to protect their professional practice, and this starts with a careful review of the mission of the university, the tenure and promotion system, and the university definition of scholarship.
Barriers to Faculty Practice
Faculty Practice
However important we think faculty practice is to the discipline of nursing; barriers to successful practice exist and are plentiful in the literature. To simplify the discussion, the identified barriers are grouped into three main categories:
Faculty practice is not viewed as a legitimate component of scholarship (Tolve, 1999); however, it has become an integral component, if not requirement, of faculty role expectation at many schools of nursing. Remaining current within the nursing profession can be difficult when a faculty commitment does not allow time or opportunity for clinical practice (Sawyer et al., 2000). Bringing faculty evaluation systems into line with current realities has become a priority nationwide (Huber, 2002). However, the demands of the university and the demands of the profession remain imbalanced and unclear. The lack of understanding of faculty employment requirements across campus can lead to further confusion. Often, meeting the demands of certifying bodies alone can drain faculty time and resources. The American Nurses Credentialing Center and the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners requires 1,000 hours of practice every 5 years for recertification as an advanced practice nurse, along with 150 hours of continuing education (American Nurse Credentialing Center, 2008). The AACN (1999) views professional practice as critical to remain competent within the nursing profession. The National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties considers faculty practice to be essential for nursing faculty, especially if they are teaching in a clinical course (National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties, 2005). The National League of Nursing Accrediting Agency (2006) endorsed Boyer's definition of scholarship; “these four aspects of scholarship are salient to academic nursing, where each specific area supports the values of a profession committed to both social relevance an scientific advancement” (National League of Nursing Accrediting Agency, 2006, p. 80). Faculties provide many reasons for choosing not to practice. In fulfilling the roles of educator, scholar, and clinician, faculty often feel strained. Although teaching and student advisement remain the most important responsibility, faculty are often overwhelmed with the continued demands of the university while trying to meet the demands of the profession (Newland & TruglioLondrigan, 2003, Tolve, 1999). Most faculty are in agreement that clinical practice is an integral part of their role as educators. How can one teach what one does not practice? How can practice not be a requirement of those who teach in a practice profession? Where are students to find their role models if not in their teachers? Where is the content for nursing curricula generated if not from practice? (Newland & TruglioLondrigan, 2003). Five main domains benefiting from faculty practice identified through a review of the literature include the students, the university, the community,
1. Narrow definition of scholarship on university
and college campus. 2. Lack of recognition of professional practice
within the traditional triad reward system of teaching, scholarship, and service. 3. Blending of the roles of professional nurse and educator, including the growing university demand s on the nurse educator. The definition of scholarship used by most institutional reward systems to evaluate faculty work is very narrow, referring mostly to basic or theoretical research published in peer-reviewed journals (Boyer, 1990; Hofmeyer, Newton, & Scott, 2007; O'Meara, 2006). The very idea of defining scholarship as research is part of university tradition, which in a tradition-bound setting, the very idea of change can be very unpopular (Kirwin, 2005). However, the current view of “scholarship equals research” fails to meet the full expectations of the community for which the university is said to serve (Hofmeyer et al., 2007), as well as the faculty who may or may not excel in published research. A more integrated approach to scholarship values differences and promotes a way of working that blends the dual role of nurse educator and practicing nurse (Andrew & Wilkie, 2007). In most academic institutions, research, teaching, and service are the primary components of scholarship, and the basis of university merit reviews, promotion, and tenure decisions. The definition of scholarship gains specific meaning when an individual case is evaluated and ruled upon by the promotion and tenure committee (Huber, 2002). Research and publication generally receive significantly more weight in these decisions than either teaching or service (Tolve, 1999). Within this traditional model, nursing faculty, particularly nurse practitioner faculty, face a dilemma of how to meet their professional practice expectations while fulfilling the traditional academic components of scholarship. When scholarship is narrowly defined as peer review research, faculty who excel in teaching, application, and integrated forms of scholarly activity suffer (Hofmeyer et al., 2007). “The current tenure and promotion system exacts a high price. It is costly to communities, which aren't getting access to educational partners; to students, who do not have opportunities for significant public work through the curriculum; and to faculty scholars, who can't claim
SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY
93
the nursing discipline, and the faculty themselves. Many nurse educators are offered their first teaching job because of their clinical knowledge and skills, with the expectation that these qualities make them good role models for students. The ability to introduce theoretical concepts by illustrating them with real stories of patients and situations that reflect current clinical experiences can change what students may interpret as ideology into lasting impressions (Little & Milliken, 2007). This scenario provides unparalleled opportunities for teaching about the essentials of nursing practice while faculty establish important credibility in the eyes of the students, inspiring them to a higher level of nursing practice. Maintaining competency is essential for role modeling and mentoring (National League of Nursing, 2005). In addition, faculty practice can provide increased sites for students' clinical rotations. This arrangement not only benefits the students but also provides control over the learning activities and the quality of care provided (Dracup, 2004; Tolve, 1999). The nursing discipline also benefits from faculty practice. This unique situation promotes communication and collaboration between practice, education, and other disciplines closing the practice–theory gap. It also offers a rich environment for observing these gaps to further study quality patient care. These research opportunities can help implement best practices based on outcomes, creating a living laboratory for evidenced-based practice (Becker et al., 2007; Dracup, 2004; Tolve, 1999). The university and the community can also benefit from faculty practice. Nursing faculty are generally highly visible within the community, and faculty who choose to practice are well positioned to become leaders with the community, embodying the values of the university (Dracup, 2004). Faculty practice can also provide potential revenue opportunities through community- and/or university-based clinics. This model of practice has proven profitable while also providing a very valuable service to the community and the student population (Becker et al., 2007). Finally, faculty practice allows nurse educators to stay current within the rapidly changing health care systems of today. This connection with reality provides the opportunity for faculty to transfer their knowledge to the nursing curriculum and possibly alter teaching strategies within the nursing programs (Tolve,1999). Furthermore, faculty practice exemplifies professionalism by role modeling service to others, displaying autonomy, and promoting self-regulation (Blair et al., 2005). However, the overall goal of faculty practice is to improve the standard of patient care (Newland & Truglio-Londrigan, 2003). Faculty practice brings teaching, research, and service together within our academic setting in ways that will benefit students, the public, and the profession. (Edwards, 2002).
Research In 1999, a survey, conducted by Tolve, was distributed among nursing deans and faculty in colleges and universities across the United States who offer baccalau-
reate and/or higher degree programs in nursing to explore the concept of scholarship and faculty practice (Tolve, 1999). Scholarship was defined as the generation, application, dissemination, and advancement of nursing knowledge in a variety of roles and settings. Faculty respondents stressed that nursing is a practice discipline with knowledge gained by application. Deans and faculty described the components of scholarship as research and publication, teaching, service, faculty practice, and presentations, with research and publication being most valued in promotion and tenure process. Respondents to the survey agreed that nursing faculty face role conflict and fragmentation, and faculty do not believe it is humanly possible to achieve a successful balance. The suggestion was an approach in which teaching and service are considered to be the two essential components of scholarship for faculty, with a choice being made as to whether the faculty member would then develop expertise in research and publication or faculty practice. O'Meara (2006) distributed a survey to chief academic officers' of 4-year institutions concerning the process of tenure and promotion on their campus. Sixty-eight percent of the respondents reported that their institutions had made formal changes to their reward system over the last 10 years to encourage multiple forms of scholarship, whereas 32% reported their institution had not. The most popular formal policy changes were expanding the definition of scholarship used in faculty evaluation policies (76%). Results from this survey suggest that institutions of higher learning can gain a competitive advantage by establishing a reward system that honors multiple forms of scholarship. In addition, these institutions were significantly more likely than their counterparts to report an increase in faculty involvement in the “scholarship of application, the scholarship of teaching and learning, and the scholarship of integration” and an increased “overall satisfaction with roles and rewards” (p. 49).
Organizational Framework Paskiewicz (2003) developed the Organizational Framework of Faculty Role (Figure 1) to emphasize her clinical practice in her promotion and tenure materials. This organizational framework offered the author an opportunity to reflect on her strengths and weakness in the areas of research, teaching, and service as she prepared for the critical review of her work for tenure. The author placed clinical practice in the center of the framework as it informed all areas of the faculty role. It is connected to the traditional expectation of faculty work: research, teaching, and service. Professional development was included by the author to signify the connection of clinical practice, scholarship, and teaching and because it is a part of the faculty evaluation at the authors institution. The inner structure was surrounded by two rings that represent additional factors that influence the faculty members journey to tenure and promotion with the inner ring signifying the administrative role in the process of tenure and promotion and the outer ring
94
BOSOLD AND DARNELL
Figure 1. Organizational framework of faculty role. Reprinted with author's permission (Paskiewicz, 2003).
representing the mission of the university. The author did use the definition of scholarship as proposed by Boyer (1990), with the scholarship of application emphasized as the direct patient-centered activities that are the center of the discipline of nursing. (Paskiewicz, 2003).
Conclusion Ultimately, the public is better served when those teaching our next generation of nurses have the skills and knowledge to model relevant and competent clinical nursing practice. Nurse educators who are able to “practice what they preach” are regarded as credible leaders, inspirational mentors, and understanding colleagues (Little & Milliken, 2007). Currently, nursing faculty are expected to meet two differing sets of expectations: one outlined in their institution's formal promotion and tenure policies and the other implicit and mandated by their profession (Tolve, 1999). “If dedicated time for scholarship is not provided with an infrastructure to support and formalize this, faculty engaged in direct and indirect care of patients will remain at the lower academic ranks with less opportunity for promotion” (Becker et al, 2007). The question no longer is whether faculty practice is essential, but rather how can faculty practice be integrated within the institutions present mission, vision, and cultural values? (Newland & Truglio-Londrigan, 2003). Career flexibility including practice and research opportunities for tenured and tenure-track faculty is a necessity to ensure that today's faculty are able to prepare for annual evaluation and the promotion and tenure process (Kirwin, 2005). Nursing programs are challenged with developing faculty practice arrangements that enhance curricula and provide clinical opportunities for students and opportunities for scholarly clinical practice by the faculty while offering financial support for these valuable experiences (Newland & Truglio-Londrigan, 2003). Consequently, how do we establish the critical connection between the academic triad model and nursing
practice so that we as a profession can demonstrate the high standards of care and the excellence of academia? Individual academic disciplines can be given the responsibility of determining if a specific activity meets the criteria for achieving scholarship goals identified by the department that respects the priorities of the institution, the school, and the discipline. This proposed system is equitable, and the established criteria could be clearly understood by the departmental review committees. This would ensure that no one discipline or group of disciplines would determine what scholarship should be for another discipline. This model would also prove rewarding and cost-effective, in that faculty members being reviewed for promotion or tenure know what is required of them and faculty members serving on review committees can focus their attention on the quality of the portfolio and process rather than on whether the activity should be considered scholarly (Diamond, 2002, p. 77). Finally, if we do not concentrate on attracting and retaining greater numbers of highly qualified professionals within a practice discipline to join us in the academic setting, we simply will be unable to accommodate the growing student population in nursing. We will be forced to limit class size or compromise the quality of education we can provide (Kirwin, 2005). “Diversity and excellence go hand in hand, so we must be vigilant in creating environments that welcome and nurture diverse and excellent people and ideas” (Cantor, 2005). Professional practice that should be regarded as scholarly activity within a nursing paradigm has recently been brought before the faculty senate committee here at Arkansas Tech University. After a lengthy discussion from all represented disciplines on our campus, a decision was made to include an additional opportunity to satisfy the criteria for scholarly or creative activity related to the university's tenure and promotion process to include “professional practices to obtain/maintain state or nationally recognized certifications/licensures” (ATU Faculty Handbook, 2011, p. 27). The ultimate goal of this addendum is to allow all practice disciplines on our campus to better connect their role as educator to their professional practice as suggested by Boyer while also fulfilling the obligations for scholarship necessary for the university's tenure and promotion process.
References Andrew, N., & Wilkie, G. (2007). Integrated scholarship in nursing: An individual responsibility or collective undertaking. Nurse Education Today, 27, 1–4. Arkansas Tech University. (2008/2009). Faculty evaluation, promotion, and tenure policies and procedures. Faculty handbook: Arkansas Tech University. Available at www.atu.edu. Arkansas Tech University. (2011/2012). Faculty evaluation, promotion, and tenure policies and procedures. Faculty Handbook: Arkansas Tech University. Available at http://www. atu.edu/academics/facultyhandbook.shtml. American Nurses Credentialing Center. (2008). Retrieved April 10, 2008, from http://www.nursecredentialing.org/cert/ eligibility.html.
SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY
American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (1999). Position statement on defining scholarship for the discipline of nursing. Retrieved January 18, 2008, from http://www.aacn. nche.edu/publications/positions/scholar.htm. Becker, K. L., Dang, D., Jordon, E., Kub, J., Wlech, A., Smith, C., et al. (2007). An evaluation framework for faculty practice. Nursing outlook, 55, 44–54. Blair, K., Dennehy, P., & White, P. (2005). Nurse practitioner faculty practice: An expectation of professionalism. National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties. Retrieved January 21, 2008, from http://www.nonpf.org/FPStatement2005Final.pdf. Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Boyer, E. (1992). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Issues in Accounting Education, 92, 87–91. Cantor, N. (2005). Tenure-track faculty careers. The Presidency, 8, 35–37. Dalhousie University. (1993). Retrieved January 18, 2008, from http://healthprofessions.dal.ca/Files/ScholarshipDefinition.pdf. Diamond, R. (2002). Defining scholarship for the twenty-first century. Dew Directions for Teaching and Learning, 90, 73–79. Dracup, K. (2004). Impact of faculty practice on an academic institution's mission and vision. Nursing Outlook, 52, 174–178. Edwards, J. (2002). Faculty practice and health policy: Implications for leaders in nursing education. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 26, 62–71. Fay W. Boozman College of Public Health University of Arkansas for Medical Science, W. (2007). Guidelines: Application for promotion and tenure. Retrieved January 21, 2008, from http://depts.washington.edu/ccph/pdf_files/UAMS.pdf. Harris, D., DaRosa, D., Phillip, L., & Hash, R. (2003). Facilitating academic institutional change: Redefining scholarship. Family Medicine, 35, 187–194. Hofmeyer, A., Newton, M., & Scott, C. (2007). Valuing the scholarship of integration and the scholarship of application in the academy for health sciences scholars: Recommended methods. Health Policy and Research Systems, 5, 5. Retrieved January 18, 2008, from http://www.health-policy-systems.com/content/5/1/5.
95
Huber, M. (2002). Faculty evaluation and the development of academic careers. New Directions for Institutional Research, 114, 83. Kirwin, W. (2005). The time for change is now. The Presidency, 8, 34–36. Little, M. A., & Milliken, P. J. (2007). Practicing what we preach: Balancing teaching and clinical practice competencies. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 4, 1 Article 6. National League of Nursing. (2006). NLNAC Accreditation Manual and Interpretive Guidelines. Retrieved January 18, 2008, from http://www.nlnac.org/manuals/NLNACManual2006.pdf. National League of Nursing. (2005). Core competencies of nurse educators with task statements. Retrieved January 18, 2008, from http://www.nln.org/facultydevelopment/pdf/ corecompetencies.pdf. National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties. (2005). Retrieved January 18, 2008, from http://www.nonpf. org/fppromten.htm. Newland, J., & Truglio-Londrigan, M. (2003). Faculty practice: Facilitation of clinical integrations into the academic triad model. Journal of Professional Nursing, 19, 269–278. Paskiewicz, L. (2003). Clinical practice: An emphasis strategy for promotion and tenure. Nursing Forum, 38, 21–26. O'Meara, K. (2006). Encouraging multiple forms of scholarship in faculty reward systems: Influence on faculty work life. Planning Higher Education, 34, 43–53. Sorcinelli, M. (2002). New conceptions of scholarship for a new generation of faculty members. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 90, 41–48. The Higher Learning Commission. (2003). Handbook of Accreditation. (pp. 3.1–5). Retrieved from www.ncahigher learningcommission.org. Tolve, C. (1999). Nursing scholarship: Role of faculty practice. Clinical Excellence for Nurse Practitioners, 3, 28–33. Sawyer, M., Alexander, I., Gordon, L., Juszczak, L., & Gilliss, C. (2000). A critical review of current nursing faculty practice. Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners, 12, 511–516.