Quantitative background on the shortage of research doctorates in CSD D. Kimbrough Oller University of Memphis With lots of help from Howard Goldstein, Cheryl Scott, Sarah Slater, Judith Cooper and the members of the Joint Ad Hoc Committee on the Doctoral Shortage

The well-known problem of positions and failure of recruitment Most searches for tenure-line faculty positions in Communication Sciences and Disorders are difficult to complete A recent survey by ASHA indicates there are only 2.3 applicants per open tenure-line position Many positions remain unfilled yearly Programs are in jeopardy, sometimes for survival, because of difficulties in recruitment of tenure-line faculty

How bad is the problem currently?  We have data from the most recent Council survey of graduate programs regarding the number of unfilled openings for doctoral faculty  These data are based on a new question in the survey, one that was not asked until the cycle; the question targeted the last three years  We’ll call the number of unsuccessful tenure-line searches during these years, ‘the shortage’  The data suggest that the shortage has nearly doubled during that period  Numbers represented in the next graph are based on figures adjusted to a 100% reporting rate, but of course the growing shortage is clear with or without adjusted figures

Faculty shortage : adjusted figures Number of searches unfilled Source: CAPCSD Survey

Magnitude of the current problem as a proportion of full-time lines The eight-year average of Council data make it possible to estimate that there are about 2680 full-time faculty positions in Communication Sciences and Disorders nationally (adjusted to 100% sampling) About 65% of these are doctoral lines over the same period; that’s 1723 doctoral lines At 50 unfilled positions in the year 1998, the shortage was 2.8%, and at 98 unfilled positions in the year 2000, the shortage was 5.4% (assuming that 65% of full-time lines and a base of 1723 is an appropriate level of research doctoral faculty in the field) At 50 the problem was already deemed a serious one by most academic participants in our field Many had thought the shortage would begin to accumulate sometime soon, based on demographic trends (graying of the profession), and it appears that the suspected accumulating shortage is already underway

The role of the graying of the professorate We have long been warned that our professorate is older than is optimal Too many retirements could create tremendous flux and loss of research and training quality The primary data upon which the presumed graying of the professorate have been based actually come from the ASHA Constituent Database They indicate numbers of Ph.D. holders at various ages who are ASHA members The data were first addressed by Bruce Tomblin in 1996 in an address to the Legislative Council of ASHA when he was Chair of the Research and Scientific Affairs Committee In an ideal situation one might expect a relatively flat distribution

Distribution of Ph.D. holders by age from ASHA constituent database, 1996, work by Bruce Tomblin and Sarah Slater ages in 5-year groupings Mean = Median = 51.64

Distribution of Full-time Ph.D. Professors and Chairs by Age from ASHA constituent database, 1996, ages Mean = Median = 49.68

Distribution of Ph.D. faculty by age in Programs offering the Ph.D. from the Joint Ad Hoc Committee Survey, 2002 Mean full-time = Median full-time = Mean part-time = Median part-time = FULL-TIME N = 575 PART-TIME N = 59

The demographic situation suggests rapidly increasing retirements over the next few years Several historical factors combined to produce a distribution of Ph.D.’s by age that is not at all flat; in fact it is very peaked As years pass the number of retirements may go up rapidly as the peak in the distribution may move rightward If we judge correctly from the distribution, the major impact of massive numbers of retirements has not yet been felt But even now we are in a condition of shortage The situation is already getting worse, but it may get dramatically worse, over the next years

Is the field adapting appropriately to the impending decline in Ph.D. faculty? In the most recent data there has been an increase in the production rate of new Ph.D.’s, but whether the increase will be maintained or accelerated remains to be seen – it could be merely a product of year to year fluctuation Number of programs (Master’s and Ph.D.) is not going down, not yet at least Over the past few years the number of faculty in the field has actually been rising fairly fast according to the Council data In some cases Master’s faculty appear to be filling lines that could not be filled in Ph.D. tenure-line searches, but the data are inconclusive on both the amount of growth in faculty and the role of Master’s hiring in that growth

Production rate for new Ph.D. scholars in Communication Sciences and Disorders Up to 1999 we see no important increase in the production rate of new Ph.D.’s based on data from the National Opinion Research Center Through 1998 the same is true of the Council survey The data from the Council and the NORC suggest there may have been a significant upturn It can be hoped this is not a short-term improvement, but data on enrollment patterns are among the more difficult ones to interpret in the various available surveys

National Opinion Research Center data on doctoral degrees granted in SLP and AUD Ph.D.degreesgranted

Council of Academic Programs data on doctoral degrees granted in SLP and AUD Ph.D.degreesgranted

Council of Academic Programs data on doctoral degrees granted in SLP and AUD with breakdowns

Council of Academic Programs data on enrolled doctoral students in SLP and AUD Ph.D.students

Number of all programs in the field

Number of programs in the field with breakdown by discipline

Number of Ph.D. programs in the field

Number of full-time faculty in Communication Sciences and Disorders Communication Sciences and Disorders

The challenge We need to be proactive: the field is going to be restructured one way or the other Organize an academically significant plan for the future, and guide it through an administrative structure with continuity – a standing committee, as was recommended by Fox, Minifie, Smit, and Hochberg in the Report of the working group on doctoral and postdoctoral education, 1997 (Council Proceedings) The forces will change, and if the Council and ASHA do not act, the field will change very unpredictably The question is how to maintain the academic foundations of the field in a time of enormous change Further, how can we govern our programs with an appropriate balance of academic and clinical activities

proportion funded FROM JUDITH COOPER, SLP APPLICATIONS AND FUNDING AT NIDCD SINCE 1995

proportion funded FROM JUDITH COOPER, AUDIOLOGY APPLICATIONS AND FUNDING AT NIDCD SINCE 1995