Transcript Decline in Doctoral Graduates

Variety Among Technical /
Technology Education
Doctoral Programs
Jim Flowers
Edward Lazaros (Holly Baltzer)
Ball State University
Presented through the Council on Technology Teacher Education at the International
Technology Education Association Conference in Salt Lake City, UT, February 21, 2008
http://jcflowers1.iweb.bsu.edu/pres/2008ITEA.ppt
This study was funded in part through a CTTE research incentive grant.
3 – Phase Study
1. Perceived demand for an online or hybrid
doctoral program from a survey of
prospective students
2. Hiring attitudes towards those with a
doctoral degree earned online
3. Status of current doctoral programs
Phase 3: Results of
telephone interviews with
19 program directors /
chairs in 2006/2007
Baltzer, H., Lazaros, E., & Flowers, J.,
(2007). Review of doctoral programs in
technical education. J. of Industrial
Teacher Education, 44(2), 37-59.
Earlier Phases
Flowers, J., & Baltzer, H. (2006). Perceived demand for
online and hybrid doctoral programs in technical
education. J. of Industrial Teacher Education, 43(4), 3956. Retrieved from
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JITE/v43n4/pdf/flowers.pdf
Flowers, J., & Baltzer, H. (2006). Hiring technical
education faculty: Vacancies, criteria, and attitudes toward
online doctoral degrees. J. of Industrial Teacher Education,
43(3), 29-44. Retrieved from
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JITE/v43n3/pdf/flowers.pdf
Disturbing Trends
Doctoral Graduates in IA/TE
90
80
83 (Volk)
70
60
50
50 (Volk)
40
30
20
19 (Rogers)
10
0
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Doctoral Graduates in IA/TE
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Difficulties in Hiring TE Faculty
TE Search Failure Rates
40%
34%
35%
30%
27%
25%
24%
20%
1997-1998
1998-1999
2000-2001
Source: Brown, D. (2002). Supply and Demand Analysis of Industrial Teacher
Education Faculty. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 40(1), 60-73.
Difficulties in Hiring TE Faculty
Applicants per Position
20
17.3
15
9.6
10
8.5
2002
2000
1987
5
75% of Brown’s (2002) respondents
found the applicant pool “inadequate.”
Source: Brown, D. (2002). Supply and Demand Analysis of Industrial Teacher
Education Faculty. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 40(1), 60-73.
Possible Implications
Not enough quality applicants for higher education
positions
– Failed searches?
– Lowering expectations?
– Possible program closures?
Less research in the field of technology education
• Reed (2002) noted there was “a steady decline in graduate
research” (p. 68)
Online Education
Online Education in the US is growing
– Enrollments are increasing.
– Becoming a part of many institutions long-term
strategies
However, it is not growing uniformly
– Doctoral programs have the least program
penetration (institutions offering the same
program face-to-face and online.)
– Technical education fits this trend
2005 Program Penetration Rates
the “proportion of institutions that offer a
particular type of face-to-face course or program
[and] provide the same type of offering online”
(p. 5)
Bachelor’s: 29.9%
Master’s: 43.6%
Doctoral: 12.4%
Source: Allen, I. E., and Seaman, J., (2005). Growing by degrees: Online education in the United States, 2005.
Needham, MA: Sloan-C. Retrieved October 18, 2006 from
http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/pdf/growing_by_degrees.pdf
Phase 3 Goal
To record a “snapshot” of existing programs and
assess the readiness of the field for distance
doctoral programs according to TE doctoral
program directors / chairs.
–
–
–
–
–
–
Program Characteristics
Themes and Directions
Faculty Vacancies & Hiring Criteria
Online Elements
Obstacles, Solutions, & Opportunities
Recommendations from Chairs/Program Directors
Target Audience
Those designing/implementing doctoral
programs
Future applicants for faculty positions
Those contemplating doctoral study
Methodology
Investigation of Online Materials
Telephone Interviews of Chairs or Doctoral
Program Directors in 2006 / 2007
– One of two interviewers
– Discussion among three researchers, including
identification of themes and classification of
data, until consensus
Sample
List of PhD and EdD programs
– Industrial Teacher Education Directory for 2005-2006
– www.petersons.com
– www.gradschools.com
One chair/coordinator per institution
23 verified doctoral programs
19 agreed to participate in telephone interviews
Sincere thanks go to the
chairs / directors at the
following institutions.
Participating Institutions
Clemson University
– PhD and EdD in Workforce Education and Development
Indiana State University
– PhD in Technology Management (Consortium)
North Carolina State University
– EdD in Technology Education
Oklahoma State University
– PhD in Education, option in Occupational Education
Old Dominion University
– PhD in Education, concentration in Occupational & Technical
Studies
Participating Institutions
Purdue University
– PhD in Curriculum & Instruction, concentration in Career &
Technical Education
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
– PhD in Education, concentration in Workforce Education
The Ohio State University
– PhD in Integrated Mathematics, Science, & Technology
Education
University of British Columbia
– PhD and EdD in Curriculum Studies, concentration in
Technology
University of Georgia
– PhD and EdD in Workforce Education
Participating Institutions
University of Manitoba
– PhD in Education, area in Technology or Technology Education
University of Minnesota
– PhD and EdD in Work & Human Resource Education
University of Nevada-Las Vegas
– PhD Higher Education, Workforce Education & Development
University of North Texas
– PhD and EdD in Applied Technology & Performance Improvement
University of South Florida
– PhD in Curriculum & Instruction, concentration in Career &
Workforce Ed.
Participating Institutions
Utah State University
– PhD and EdD in Education (Curriculum & Instruction), emphasis
in Engineering & Technology Ed.
Valdosta State University
– EdD in Adult & Career Education
Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University
– PhD and EdD in Curriculum & Instruction, concentration in
Technology Education
Western Michigan University
– PhD in Educational Leadership, Concentration in Career &
Technical Education
Degree Type (N = 19)
Degree Type
–
–
–
–
10 PhD only
2 EdD only
7 EdD and PhD
Some noted the phasing out of EdD
Consortium Program
Program Themes
What is the primary theme, or what sets apart the respondents
doctoral program?” (n=17, multiple responses were possible)
Educational Studies
Research
STEM Integration
Private Sector
Technical/Industrial
Student-Centered Program
Technology and Society
6
3
2
2
2
2
1
Program Evolution
How is the respondent’s program evolving or what new directions is
the program taking? (n = 17, multiple responses were possible)
STEM
4
Research
4
Introducing online elements
3
Improving quality of teaching and curriculum
3
Attracting international students
3
Changing from an EdD to a PhD
3
Workforce training
2
Leadership
1
Students & Faculty
Full time doctoral students
– Mean = 45.1, SD = 41.2, n = 15
– without consortium, mean = 37.4, SD = 27.4, range = 5 to 82
Doctoral enrollment is reported as
– Growing: 7
– Stable: 8
– Shrinking: 3
Number of doctoral faculty
– Mean = 10.9, SD = 11.1, n = 15, range = 1 to 40
Ratio of 3.4 students per faculty
– this overlooks other faculty assignments
Faculty Vacancies
The average number of current tenure track
faculty vacancies per department was 1.2 (SD =
1.3, n = 15). The average for contract faculty was
0.5 (SD = 1.2, n = 12).
The predicted number of vacancies for tenure
track faculty over the next 5 years ranged from 0
to 30, with an average of 5.0 (SD = 7.2, n = 15), or
1.0 per year. For contract faculty over the next five
years the average was 3.3 (SD = 3.6, n = 9), or .72
per year.
Hiring Criteria
Main Hiring Criteria for a Tenure Track Position (n = 16, multiple
responses were possible)
Research and publications
11
Holds a terminal degree
6
Teaching experience or formal teaching preparation
5
Industry experience
5
Personality and fit
3
Specifically public school teaching experience
3
Service
2
Grants and funding
2
Enthusiasm and dedication
2
Knowledge of distance education technologies
1
Knowledge of state educational law and mandates
1
Good recommendations
1
Teaching Load
The teaching load varied from 1.5 to 4 three-credit
courses per semester with a mean of 2.56.
Faculty Load Reported as Number of Three Credit Hour
Courses Per Semester (n = 18, Mean = 2.56).
Courses
Programs
1.0
0
1.5
1
2.0
8
2.5
1
3.0
6
3.5
0
4.0
2
Emphasis placed on research,
teaching, and service for a new
faculty member
Mean Research / Teaching / Service
emphases were
46% / 36% / 18%
but research ranged from 25% to 80%.
– (25 / 54 / 21% at Bach & Masters institutions)
Hiring Preferences
11 of 15 reportedly preferred a candidate
with a face-to-face degree.
– F2F over hybrid; hybrid over online
Quality of program/institution was
mentioned by some over delivery method.
Online Elements
8
7
6
Programs
11/17 use faculty-at-adistance
11/18 offer at least one
grad class by DE
7/16 plan to offer
more online grad
classes
5
4
3
2
1
0
0
1 to 5
6 to 10
Number of Courses
11+
Transitioning to an Online Program
7/16 suggested their program could be
transitioned to an online or nearly online
model.
Old Dominion has transitioned to DE.
How much is an online doctorate
program needed by the field?
Mean of 4.2 (n=15) on a scale of 1 (not at
all) to 10 (extremely)
Reasons:
– Perceived weakness
– Inability of DE to provide rich experience
– Would not be received as well during hiring
Comments
“Don't. Try to figure out a hybrid design. You've got to get
people on campus. Even the informal things that happen
are priceless, discussions over coffee, for example...”
“Don't promise more than what you can deliver. Be honest
about what an online degree will actually do for them. If a
person wants a doctorate degree to get a pay raise at the
secondary level, an online degree is good. If they want to
get a doctorate degree to go to the next level in their
career an online degree will not get that for them…”
Program Obstacles
(n Historic = 16, n Present = 14, multiple responses were possible)
Historic
Present
Too few staff & faculty; too many students
9
8
Lack of administrative support
6
5
Lack of funding for students
2
3
Lack of organization
1
3
University requirements outside department
2
Broaden course offerings
2
Increasing student costs
1
Lack of program philosophy
1
Changing field
2
Attrition
2
Disagreement within faculty
1
Losing organizational history
1
Reported Solutions
(n Historic = 9, n Present = 10, multiple responses were possible)
Historic
Present
Fundamental change in the program
2
4
More funding
1
4
Increase faculty or limit number of students
4
2
Change in administration
Add alternative course delivery
2
1
1
More funding for students
1
Increase course offerings
1
Ways of better meeting student needs
1
Revise course cancellation requirements
1
More research
1
Program Opportunities
Funding and grants
Fundamental change in program itself
Partnering with other universities or programs
Increase the number of students
Ways of better meeting student needs
Partnering with state agencies
Increase admission selectivity
Attract and accommodate international students
Funding for distance elements
11
4
3
3
2
1
1
1
1
Recommendations for newly forming
F2F doctoral TE programs.
(n = 15, multiple responses were possible)
A research emphasis
6
Administration support and funding
3
Focus on college faculty preparation
3
Ways of better meeting student needs
2
Increase online elements
2
Better allocation of resources
2
Emphasize leadership
1
Shift to regional institutions
1
Better marketing
1
Increase admission selectivity
1
Attract international students
1
Respondents’ Recommendations
A Research Emphasis
– “We have to prepare doctoral students to be
future researchers. We have a pitiful research
database. They have to be articulate, they have
to communicate well, and their research has to
be respected. Otherwise we are dead, and
should be.”
Respondents’ Recommendations
More support, promotion, etc.
– “You have to have a commitment from the
administration for financial support. We have
more programs than we know what to do with
and no infrastructure has changed. You need
support staff, travel funds, graduate assistants.
Just more faculty doesn't help. Promotion of the
program is important and funds need to be
allocated for it.”
Respondents’ recommendations for newly
forming online doctoral TE programs.
(n = 16, multiple responses were possible)
Consider hybrid, blended or consortiums
6
Bad idea
3
Use various and appropriate instructional technologies
3
Must have quality assurances
3
Provide meaningful interactions
3
Rigorous admissions requirements
2
Be honest about hiring bias
2
Provide many student resources
1
Base degree on research and scholarship
1
Must have program support
1
Student-centered education
1
Must have high quality professors
1
Respondents’ Recommendations
Demand quality
– “I don’t like it. Don’t compromise quality.”
Conclusions
Diversity among programs
– Size, Theme, Loads, Research Emphasis
Preference for F2F with pockets of
acceptance
– Quality concerns
Opportunities
Variety Among Technical /
Technology Education
Doctoral Programs
Jim Flowers
Edward Lazaros (Holly Baltzer)
Ball State University
Presented through the Council on Technology Teacher Education at the International
Technology Education Association Conference in Salt Lake City, UT, February 21, 2008
http://jcflowers1.iweb.bsu.edu/pres/2008ITEA.ppt
This study was funded in part through a CTTE research incentive grant.