| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Association Report |
Key words: dental faculty, vacancies, recruitment, retention, academic careers
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract Survey methodology2004 Dental School Faculty...Characteristics of vacant...Lost faculty positionsFactors influencing the ability...Factors influencing faculty...Sources of new facultyProjected vacant budgeted...Summary discussionReferences |
|---|
Throughout the 1990s the number of vacant budgeted faculty positions at U.S. dental schools increased, reaching a peak of 358 positions in 2000. The peak number of full-time vacancies was 287 in 1997. Since 2000, the number of vacancies has trended downwards, standing at 275 in 2004–05, of which 250 were full-time vacancies. The 2004–05 survey of vacant budgeted faculty positions continues to provide information relative to trends in the faculty workforce, factors influencing faculty vacancies, and the impact of vacant positions on dental schools.
|
Survey Methodology |
|---|
|
TopAbstractSurvey methodology2004 Dental School Faculty...Characteristics of vacant...Lost faculty positionsFactors influencing the ability...Factors influencing faculty...Sources of new facultyProjected vacant budgeted...Summary discussionReferences |
|---|
Data was also obtained from the 2004 survey of dental educators. This survey is distributed to each school electronically and used to track information on faculty and changes in the faculty workforce at the fifty-six U.S. dental schools. In 2004, there was a reported total of 11,715 full-time, part-time, and volunteer faculty members. Data collected also included the reasons for departure from faculty positions and sources of new faculty.
|
2004 Dental School Faculty Workforce |
|---|
|
TopAbstractSurvey methodology2004 Dental School Faculty...Characteristics of vacant...Lost faculty positionsFactors influencing the ability...Factors influencing faculty...Sources of new facultyProjected vacant budgeted...Summary discussionReferences |
|---|
The tenure status was reported for 10,760 faculty members. Among this group of faculty, 19 percent were tenured, and 6 percent were on a tenure track but had not yet obtained tenure. Seventy-four percent of faculty were on a clinical track or other nontenure track. The academic rank was reported for 11,479 of the 11,715 reported faculty members. Of these, 17 percent had attained the rank of professor and 1 percent professor emeritus. An additional 20 percent were associate professors and 38 percent assistant professors. Fourteen percent were instructors; 2 percent were lecturers. The remaining faculty members were teaching/research assistants/associates (5 percent) or another rank (4 percent).
|
Characteristics of Vacant Budgeted Positions |
|---|
|
TopAbstractSurvey methodology2004 Dental School Faculty...Characteristics of vacant...Lost faculty positionsFactors influencing the ability...Factors influencing faculty...Sources of new facultyProjected vacant budgeted...Summary discussionReferences |
|---|
). The status of one vacancy was not reported. The one-year decline in the total number of vacancies was over 7 percent, dropping from 296 vacancies in 2003–04. This decline was a result of a large decrease in part-time vacancies, from fifty-five to twenty-four. The number of full-time vacancies increased by nine, but remains well below the 280 full-time vacancies reported in 2002–03.
|
The 275 vacant positions of 2004–05 represent an average of 4.9 vacant positions per dental school. This represents a continuation of the downward trend that has been occurring since 2001–02 when the average number of vacancies was 6.4 per dental school. The vacant positions increasingly appear to be relatively evenly distributed among the dental schools (Figure 2). In 2004–05, twenty-eight schools reported four or fewer vacancies, with four schools reporting no vacant positions. Twenty-three schools reported five to nine vacant positions, and the remaining five schools reported at least ten vacancies. The number of schools with ten vacancies or more has steadily declined from a high of fourteen in 2001–02.
|
The effect of the vacancies on the ability of a school to fulfill its mission was reported by the deans at fifty-three of the fifty-six dental schools. A five-point Likert scale was used to measure the effect, with a 5 indicating the current vacancies were most significantly affecting the school’s ability to fulfill its mission. The mean reported level of significance was 2.94 in 2004–05. The median significance was 3, reported by twenty of the fifty-three dental schools. This is similar to the reported effect of vacancies on schools’ ability to fulfill their missions in prior years. Excluding institutions with no vacancies, the number of dental schools reporting a significance above 3 and below 3 was equal, with sixteen schools reporting each. The percentage of schools reporting a significance above 3 dropped from 36 percent to 31 percent in 2004–05.
As in the past, there does not appear to be a direct relationship between the number of budgeted vacant positions and the effect the vacancies have on the ability of a school to fulfill its mission. While most of the schools reporting higher significance to their vacancies had a number of vacancies greater than what was reported usual and normal for their school, several schools reported higher significance to their vacancies even though the number was less than that reported to be usual and normal. Likewise, as in the past, a number of the schools indicating that their vacancies were of lesser significance in meeting their missions had a reported number of vacancies greater than what was indicated to be usual and normal to the school. These trends continue to indicate that it may be the nature of the vacant positions, rather than the number of vacancies, that determines the significance of the vacancies in meeting the mission of the school.
Eighty-one percent of the vacant positions (223 of 275) in 2004–05 were at public dental schools. This is fifteen percentage points (42 percent) more than would be expected if the vacancies were evenly distributed between public (66 percent) and private (34 percent) dental schools.
Nearly 91 percent of the reported vacancies were full-time positions (250 of 275). Twenty-four were part-time, and the status of one was not reported (Table 1). Positions are considered full-time when they include at least eight half-day commitments to the dental school per week. In 2004–05, over two-thirds (76 percent) of the vacancies were primary clinical science appointments, including 184 full-time and twenty-three part-time positions. This number has fluctuated from year to year between 73 and 80 percent of vacant positions. Most of the remaining vacant positions in 2004–05 were appointments in research (thirty-four positions, 12 percent), basic science (fourteen positions, 5 percent), or administration (thirteen positions, 5 percent). There was a slight decline in the percentage of vacancies in administration while there was a corresponding increase in the percent of vacancies in research. The remaining vacancies were in behavioral science (three positions) and allied dental education (three positions).
|
, the primary disciplines for vacant positions during the past four years are reported. Disciplines with at least six reported vacant positions during any of the previous four years are included. As in prior years, the greatest percentage of vacancies was in general, operative, and restorative dentistry, with a total of forty-five vacancies (16 percent) in 2004–05. While some fluctuations in the distribution of vacancies among disciplines were present, there did not appear to be a specific discipline or disciplines becoming burdened by a greater share of the vacancies. No discipline experienced an increase of more than four vacancies in 2004–05. After general, operative, and restorative dentistry, the greatest numbers of vacancies were found in pediatric dentistry (twenty-nine), periodontics (twenty-eight), and prosthodontics (twenty-four).
|
). This is an increase from 21 percent in 2003–04. Sixty-five percent were extant positions, and the status of 9 percent was not reported. Nearly 83 percent of all vacant positions had an ongoing active search to fill the vacancy. Fifteen percent of the positions did not have an active search, but the positions remained accounted for on the budget. The percentage of vacant positions with an inactive search was lower than reported for each of the previous four years when the percentage has ranged from 20 to 27 percent of vacancies.
|
). This compares to 27 percent vacant for three or fewer months in 2003–04. An additional 15 percent of positions have been vacant between four and six months. Thus, half of all vacancies reported in 2004–05 have been open for six months or less. Twenty-four percent of the 2004–05 vacancies have been open for seven to twelve months. In 2003–04, 33 percent of the vacancies had been open seven to twelve months. The number of vacancies reported as being vacant for more than one year declined for the second consecutive year to 15 percent.
|
The length of vacancies for positions with inactive searches is also reported in Table 4
. Fourteen percent of vacancies open for one to twelve months did not have an active search. Nineteen percent of vacancies open for more than a year did not have an active search—down from 26 percent in 2003–04. Altogether, 13 percent of the vacant positions did not have an active search.
The academic rank for 14 percent of the vacant positions (thirty-eight) in 2004–05 was professor (Table 5). Nineteen percent (fifty-four) of vacancies were at the rank of associate professor, and 36 percent (one hundred) were at the rank of assistant professor. These percentages are very similar to those reported in 2003–04. Twenty-percent of the vacant positions were posted as positions open to more than one rank. These include 5 percent posted as being at the professor or associate professor level, 12 percent at the associate professor or assistant professor level, and 3 percent at any of the three levels. Only 4 percent of vacant positions were at the instructor level.
|
|
Lost Faculty Positions |
|---|
|
TopAbstractSurvey methodology2004 Dental School Faculty...Characteristics of vacant...Lost faculty positionsFactors influencing the ability...Factors influencing faculty...Sources of new facultyProjected vacant budgeted...Summary discussionReferences |
|---|
). The number of lost full-time positions declined from seventy-four to eighteen; the number of lost part-time positions declined from seventy-three to seven. As in 2003–04, most of the lost positions were at public institutions: seventeen of twenty-five. Eighty-three percent (fifteen positions) of the lost full-time positions were at public dental schools.
|
). Twelve percent were in administration. Allied dental education and basic science each lost one position. The primary discipline reporting the most lost positions was endodontics (six positions), followed by prosthodontics and general, operative, and restorative dentistry, each of which lost three positions (Table 8).
|
|
|
Factors Influencing the Ability to Fill a Vacancy |
|---|
|
TopAbstractSurvey methodology2004 Dental School Faculty...Characteristics of vacant...Lost faculty positionsFactors influencing the ability...Factors influencing faculty...Sources of new facultyProjected vacant budgeted...Summary discussionReferences |
|---|
. The most frequently reported factor in 2004–05 was salary/budget limitations, influencing the ability to fill 128 (47 percent) of the 275 reported vacant positions. The next most frequently reported factors were lack of response to the position announcement (40 percent) and meeting requirements of the position (36 percent). The same three factors were reported most frequently in 2003–04, although in that year meeting requirements of the position was reported more often than salary/budget limitations. The fourth most frequently reported factor in 2004–05 was the ability to meet institutional scholarship requirements (30 percent). Other factors influencing the ability to fill a vacancy were meeting board eligibility/status requirements (12 percent), meeting licensure requirements (11 percent), other department priorities/needs (11 percent), and geographic location or cost of living (9 percent).
|
|
Factors Influencing Faculty Separations |
|---|
|
TopAbstractSurvey methodology2004 Dental School Faculty...Characteristics of vacant...Lost faculty positionsFactors influencing the ability...Factors influencing faculty...Sources of new facultyProjected vacant budgeted...Summary discussionReferences |
|---|
In 2004–05 the reason for 70 percent of faculty separations was reported (Table 10). The primary reason for separation continues to be to return to or enter private practice (36 percent), although the percentage has declined from 47 percent in 2003–04. An additional 23 percent left the dental faculty workforce entirely through either retirement (20 percent) or death (3 percent). The percentage of faculty leaving for retirement increased from 15 percent in 2003–04. Eighteen percent of faculty left because they had completed a fixed term. The activities of these faculty following their departure, as well as whether they would have left if their term had not been completed, are unknown. Thirteen percent of faculty remained in dental education, but left their existing position for a position at another school, up from 9 percent in 2003–04. The remaining 10 percent of separations were for reasons other than those listed above, such as temporary leave or sabbatical.
|
|
Sources of New Faculty |
|---|
|
TopAbstractSurvey methodology2004 Dental School Faculty...Characteristics of vacant...Lost faculty positionsFactors influencing the ability...Factors influencing faculty...Sources of new facultyProjected vacant budgeted...Summary discussionReferences |
|---|
. Over half of new faculty continue to come from private practice. In 2004–05, 62 percent of all new faculty entered academia from private practice, ten percentage points greater than the prior year. The next largest source of new faculty was directly following graduation from an advanced education program (16 percent) or a D.D.S./D.M.D. program (7 percent). These percentages are lower than in 2003. An additional 2 percent of faculty enter dental education from the uniformed services. The remaining 14 percent of new faculty members left another dental school in order to accept a new faculty position.
|
|
Projected Vacant Budgeted Faculty Positions |
|---|
|
TopAbstractSurvey methodology2004 Dental School Faculty...Characteristics of vacant...Lost faculty positionsFactors influencing the ability...Factors influencing faculty...Sources of new facultyProjected vacant budgeted...Summary discussionReferences |
|---|
Using the same scale, deans were asked to report whether the number of vacancies usual and normal to the operation of the dental school has decreased (1) or increased (5) over the past five years. Thirty-one schools indicated that the number has remained about the same; however, fifteen schools indicated that it has increased (thirteen rated 4; two rated 5). Six schools reported a decline in the number of vacancies usual and normal at any given time (five rated 2; one rated 1). In addition, twenty-three deans reported increasing difficulty in filling vacant positions over the last five years. Twenty-four reported the difficulty has remained about the same, and four reported that it has become less difficult.
Thirty deans anticipate that filling vacant faculty positions will become increasingly difficult over the next five years; nineteen expect the difficulty to remain about the same. Three deans anticipate that it will become less difficult to fill vacant positions over the next five years. This may reflect, in part, the fact that almost 50 percent of deans anticipate an increase in the number of faculty vacancies they will have to fill at any one time over the next five years. Forty-eight percent anticipate the number will remain stable. Three deans anticipate a decline in vacancies.
Deans were asked to report whether they considered faculty recruitment and retention a problem at their school using a Likert scale (1=no; 5=yes). While 41 percent of the deans considered recruitment and retention at their dental school a manageable situation, nearly half considered it to be a problem. Eleven percent did not consider it a problem.
|
Summary Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractSurvey methodology2004 Dental School Faculty...Characteristics of vacant...Lost faculty positionsFactors influencing the ability...Factors influencing faculty...Sources of new facultyProjected vacant budgeted...Summary discussionReferences |
|---|
In the past decade there has been an increase in the gender and ethnic distribution of dental school faculty. The proportion of female faculty members rose from 20 percent in1994 to 26 percent in 2004. During the same period the percentage of non-Caucasian faculty members increased from 14 percent to 22 percent. Most of the increase in minority faculty members was a result of an increase in Asian/ Pacific Islander and Hispanic/Latino faculty members, each of which increased by over 80 percent. There was little change in the proportion of faculty members reported as Black or Native American. While these trends indicate that some progress has been made, it is also evident that there need to be continued efforts for the recruitment and retention of a diverse faculty workforce.
The total number of faculty is affected by the faculty separations and new faculty. There is a rather consistent annual flow of faculty into and out of dental education, ranging from 8 to 11 percent, with 9.2 percent of the faculty departing between the ADEA faculty survey of 2003–04 and 2004–05. These faculty were replaced by 1,152 new faculty members, only a small portion of whom came from positions at other dental schools. As is shown in Figure 3, there is significant overlap between the sources of new faculty and the reason faculty leave. The greatest percentage of dental faculty enter and leave dental education from and to private practice—the reported reason for 36 percent of departures and source of 61 percent of new faculty members.
|
Nearly one-fourth of separations were due to faculty leaving dental education entirely due to retirement (20 percent) or death (3 percent). As would be expected, these faculty members were at a more senior age and rank than those departing for private practice. Approximately one in eight separations (13 percent) was the result of a faculty member accepting a position at another school. It is important to note that nearly one in five (18 percent) separations were due to completion of a fixed term. It is unknown whether faculty who left upon completion of a fixed term had the opportunity to remain in a faculty position and, if not, whether they would have done so if given the opportunity. If some of these individuals could have been attracted to continue in their faculty position, they would reduce the number of future separations and vacant faculty positions.
Outside of private practice, the major source of new faculty members is directly from an educational program, whether an advanced education program (16 percent) or immediately following dental school (7 percent). Forty-four percent of these new faculty members are entering full-time positions. This is significant considering the challenges many new graduates face in paying off substantial student loans. It indicates that many new dentists have an interest in pursuing a career in academia. Educating students about the rewards of an academic career and expanding opportunities for students to manage their student debt, through faculty loan repayment programs or other initiatives, may further increase the number of new graduates entering academia. Advancing an academic career often entails moving to another school. Fourteen percent of new faculty enter their position directly from a position at another dental school. Two percent of new faculty arrive from the uniformed services.
A vacant budgeted faculty position is the result of the delay between the departure of a faculty member and the hiring of a new faculty member or the creation of an entirely new faculty position. The number of vacancies at any given point is also influenced by the length of the delay between separation and hiring of a new faculty member. In 2004–05 the number of vacant positions dropped for the fourth consecutive year to 275 budgeted vacant positions—its lowest point since 1994 when there were 257 reported vacancies. Thus, in 2004–05, there was an average of 4.9 vacant positions per dental school. The number of vacancies per school has been declining from 6.4 in 2001–02. In addition, the number of positions reported as lost, rather than vacant, dropped to twenty-five, after rising from thirty-nine to 147 in 2003–04.
Deans reported that, on average, 3.7 vacancies were usual and normal to the operation of the dental school. These vacant positions were expected as part of the delay between separation and replacement of departing faculty members. Thus, 75 percent of the vacant positions can be considered expected as a part of the turnover process. Schools reported, on average, just over one vacant position above what is usual and normal. This is reflected in the fact that, using a Likert scale of 1 (normal/usual) to 5 (recruitment/ retention problem), 53 percent of deans reported that the vacancies reflect a situation usual and normal to the operation of the school (Likert score 1 or 2) and 28 percent reported a midpoint (Likert score 3). However, 45 percent of deans reported having increasing difficulty filling vacant positions over the past five years. Similarly, 58 percent anticipated that the difficulty would increase or continue to increase over the next five years. Only 6 percent of deans anticipated less difficulty recruiting faculty in the future.
While the number of vacant positions has declined and the total number of faculty members has increased, there is ongoing anticipation of a growing number of faculty separations due to retirement. As the average age of faculty increases and more retirements are expected, it becomes increasingly important to strategically plan for these retirements. Additionally, it is important to continue to seek ways of retaining younger faculty members who consider and leave academia to enter private practice. Strategies include faculty development programs, opportunities for faculty practice, and faculty loan repayment programs. ADEA and others maintain interest and involvement in ensuring the continued strength of the faculty workforce through recruitment and development initiatives such as the Academic Dental Careers Network, Academic Careers in Dentistry video, ADEA Leadership Institute, faculty awards and Fellowship opportunities, and collecting information on the status of the faculty workforce and vacant positions. In addition, several prior ADEA Association Reports3–5 offer numerous recommendations and strategies for recruitment, development, and retention of a strong faculty workforce for dental education.
|
Footnotes |
|---|
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TopAbstractSurvey methodology2004 Dental School Faculty...Characteristics of vacant...Lost faculty positionsFactors influencing the ability...Factors influencing faculty...Sources of new facultyProjected vacant budgeted...Summary discussionReferences |
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  N. K. Haden, W. Hendricson, R. R. Ranney, A. Vargas, L. Cardenas, W. Rose, R. Ross, and E. Funk The Quality of Dental Faculty Work-Life: Report on the 2007 Dental School Faculty Work Environment Survey J Dent Educ., May 1, 2008; 72(5): 514 - 531. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. J. Hempton, D. Drakos, V. Likhari, J. B. Hanley, L. Johnson, P. Levi, and T. J. Griffin Strategies for Developing a Culture of Mentoring in Postdoctoral Periodontology J Dent Educ., May 1, 2008; 72(5): 577 - 584. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. S. Behar-Horenstein, G. Schneider-Mitchell, and R. Graff Faculty Perceptions of a Professional Development Seminar J Dent Educ., April 1, 2008; 72(4): 472 - 483. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. J. Geissberger, P. Jain, G. T. Kluemper, D. W. Paquette, L. B. Roeder, W. C. Scarfe, and B. J. Potter Realigning Biomedical Science Instruction in Predoctoral Curricula: A Proposal for Change J Dent Educ., February 1, 2008; 72(2): 135 - 141. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. D. Hendricson, E. Anderson, S. C. Andrieu, D. G. Chadwick, J. R. Cole, M. C. George, G. N. Glickman, J. F. Glover, J. S. Goldberg, N. K. Haden, et al. Does Faculty Development Enhance Teaching Effectiveness? J Dent Educ., December 1, 2007; 71(12): 1513 - 1533. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. A. Alexander Changes in Orthodontic Care Patterns in a Predoctoral Children's Dentistry Clinic J Dent Educ., December 1, 2007; 71(12): 1549 - 1553. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. M. Iacopino and T. B. Taft Core Curricula for Postdoctoral Dental Students: Recent Problems, Potential Solutions, and a Model for the Future J Dent Educ., November 1, 2007; 71(11): 1428 - 1434. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A.M. Iacopino, M.E. Pryor, T.B. Taft, and D.P. Lynch The Effect of NIDCR R25 Grant Support on the Curriculum and Culture of a Research Non-intensive Dental School J. Dent. Res., July 1, 2007; 86(7): 581 - 585. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C.-A. Trotman, N. K. Haden, and W. Hendricson Does the Dental School Work Environment Promote Successful Academic Careers? J Dent Educ., June 1, 2007; 71(6): 713 - 725. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Scarbecz and J. A. Ross The Relationship Between Gender and Postgraduate Aspirations Among First- and Fourth-Year Students at Public Dental Schools: A Longitudinal Analysis J Dent Educ., June 1, 2007; 71(6): 797 - 809. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. A. Trower Making Academic Dentistry More Attractive to New Teacher-Scholars J Dent Educ., May 1, 2007; 71(5): 601 - 605. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. H. Hsu, M. W. Roberts, J.F. C. Tulloch, and C.-A. Trotman A Study of Military Recruitment Strategies for Dentists: Possible Implications for Academia J Dent Educ., April 1, 2007; 71(4): 501 - 510. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Haj-Ali, M. P. Walker, C. S. Petrie, and J. Steven Educational Necessities to Compensate for Faculty Shortage J Dent Educ., April 1, 2007; 71(4): 511 - 515. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. R. Peterson Academic Tenure and Higher Education in the United States: Implications for the Dental Education Workforce in the Twenty-First Century J Dent Educ., March 1, 2007; 71(3): 354 - 364. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. C. Herzberg, L. G. Griffith, and M. J. Doyle Driving the future of dental research. J. Dent. Res., June 1, 2006; 85(6): 486 - 487. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
