Dental School Vacant Budgeted Faculty Positions: Academic Year

Transcription

1 Association Report Dental School Vacant Budgeted Faculty Positions: Academic Year Jacqueline E. Chmar, B.A.; Richard G. Weaver, D.D.S.; Richard W. Valachovic, D.M.D., M.P.H. Abstract: The number of vacant budgeted faculty positions in dental schools has continued to decline, dropping from 296 in to 275 in The number of lost positions declined to twenty-five, from 147 lost positions reported in While the average number of vacancies per dental school was just under five, three-quarters of these vacancies were considered usual and normal to the operation of the dental school. Based on ADEA s annual survey of dental educators, there was approximately a 9 percent faculty turnover between and , and according to the and surveys of vacant faculty positions, it is taking longer to fill vacant positions. The greatest challenges influencing the ability of a school to fill a vacancy were salary/budget limitations and lack of response to a position announcement. Still, between and , the number of dental school faculty increased from 11,348 to 11,715, including 4,736 full-time, 5,097 part-time, and 1,791 volunteer faculty members. Employment status was not reported for ninety-one individuals. Private practice remains the primary reason for faculty separations and the source of new faculty. In addition, nearly one in four new faculty members entered dental education directly following graduation from a dental or postdoctoral education program. While it may take longer to fill positions and it has become more difficult to fill some vacancies, overall, dental school deans indicated that the number of vacancies was not affecting the quality of dental education. However, between anticipated faculty retirements and current levels of faculty turnover, continued support for and development of faculty recruitment and retention programs remains essential to maintaining a quality dental education workforce. Ms. Chmar is Policy Analyst, Center for Educational Policy and Research; Dr. Weaver is Acting Director, Center for Educational Policy and Research; Dr. Valachovic is Executive Director all at the American Dental Education Association. Direct correspondence and requests for reprints to Ms. Jacqueline E. Chmar, American Dental Education Association, 1400 K Street, NW, Suite 1100, Washington, DC, 20005; phone; fax; ChmarJ@ADEA.org. Key words: dental faculty, vacancies, recruitment, retention, academic careers Dental schools experience an ongoing turnover in their faculty, with upwards of 10 percent of faculty changing each year. In the process of faculty leaving and being replaced by new faculty, a number of positions are vacant at any given point in time during the year. Each year the American Dental Education Association (ADEA) conducts a survey to determine the status and characteristics of these vacant faculty positions. In addition, ADEA s annual survey of dental educators provides information on the entire faculty workforce, including the distribution of full-time, part-time, and volunteer faculty, reasons for faculty separations, and sources of new faculty. Throughout the 1990s the number of vacant budgeted faculty positions at U.S. dental schools increased, reaching a peak of 358 positions in The peak number of full-time vacancies was 287 in Since 2000, the number of vacancies has trended downwards, standing at 275 in , of which 250 were full-time vacancies. The survey of va- cant 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 The survey instrument for reporting vacant faculty positions was sent to the dean of each U.S. dental school. The following information was requested for each vacant budgeted position at the dental school or in dental school-sponsored programs at the time the survey was completed: primary appointment, primary discipline, full-time/part-time status (along with full-time equivalency of the parttime positions), newly established or extant position, active or inactive search, length of vacancy, and factors influencing recruitment efforts. Data on vacant positions were obtained from all fifty-six U.S. dental schools. 188 Journal of Dental Education Volume 70, Number 2

2 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 Dental School Faculty Workforce The 2004 dental school faculty workforce included a total of 4,736 full-time, 5,097 part-time, and 1,791 volunteer faculty members. The status of ninety-one faculty members was not reported. Of the reported faculty, 74 percent were male and 26 percent were female. Of those for whom race/ethnicity was reported, 78 percent were white/caucasian; 11 percent were Asian/Pacific Islander; 5 percent were Hispanic/Latino; and 4 percent were Black/African American. Less than 0.3 percent were Native American, and the remaining 2 percent reported race/ ethnicity as other. Both the mean and median ages of faculty members were fifty-two. Three percent of faculty members were thirty years of age or younger. Eighteen percent were between the ages of thirtyone and forty, and 23 percent were between the ages of forty-one and fifty. The largest proportion of faculty members, 31 percent, was between the ages of fifty-one and sixty. The remaining 25 percent were over age sixty. 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 There were a total of 275 vacant budgeted faculty positions reported at U.S. dental schools in These vacancies included 250 full-time positions and twenty-four part-time positions (Figure 1). The status of one vacancy was not reported. The one-year Full-Time Positions Part-Time Positions (N=54) (N=54) (N=54) (N=54) (N=55) (N=55) (N=55) (N=55) (N=54) (N=54) (N=56) (N=56) Source: American Dental Association, Survey Center American Dental Association Figure 1. Number of vacant budgeted faculty positions in U.S. dental schools, February 2006 Journal of Dental Education 189

3 decline in the total number of vacancies was over 7 percent, dropping from 296 vacancies in This decline was a result of a large decrease in parttime 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 The number of vacant positions is influenced, in part, by the number of positions lost or no longer held as a vacant budgeted position. In , ten dental schools reported lost positions totaling twentyfive (eighteen full-time and seven part-time). In , there were 147 reported lost positions, and thirtynine were reported lost in The 275 vacant positions of represent an average of 4.9 vacant positions per dental school. This represents a continuation of the downward trend that has been occurring since 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 , 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 A certain number of vacant positions at any given time is expected and considered usual and normal to the operation of the dental school. Dental schools deans were asked to report the number of vacant positions they considered usual and normal at their school. In , the average reported usual and normal number of vacant positions was 3.7. This is similar to the average number reported in previous years. Based on this number, over 75 percent of the reported vacancies (207 of 275) were considered usual and normal in the regular turnover of faculty at the school. Still, thirty-one dental schools reported having more vacancies than considered usual and normal for their institution. 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 fivepoint 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 The median significance was 3, reported by twenty of the fifty-three dental schools. This is similar to the reported effect of vacancies on Number of Schools or less 5 to 9 10 or more Figure 2. Number of vacant budgeted positions by schools, Journal of Dental Education Volume 70, Number 2

4 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 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 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 , 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 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). In Table 2, 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 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 After general, operative, and restorative dentistry, the greatest numbers of vacancies were found in pediatric dentistry (twenty-nine), periodontics (twentyeight), and prosthodontics (twenty-four). Over a quarter (26 percent) of the vacant positions in were newly created positions (Table 3). This is an increase from 21 percent in 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. Table 1. Vacant faculty positions by primary appointment, Area of Primary Appointment Vacant Positions Total Full-/Part-Time Percent Full-Time Part-Time Vacant Positions of Total Clinical Science % Basic Science % Behavioral Science % Administration % Allied Dental % Research % Total Reported by Category Not Reported 1 Total of Both Full- and Part-Time 275 February 2006 Journal of Dental Education 191

5 Table 2. Vacant faculty positions by discipline, 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 Primary Discipline Number/Percent of Reported Vacant Positions General, Operative, Restorative 64 19% 40 14% 55 19% 45 16% Pediatric Dentistry 24 7% 28 10% 26 9% 29 10% Periodontics 45 13% 25 8% 33 11% 28 10% Prosthodontics 32 9% 24 8% 23 8% 24 9% Orthodontics 21 6% 18 6% 18 6% 19 7% Oral/Maxillofacial Surgery 32 9% 37 12% 22 8% 18 7% Endodontics 18 5% 25 8% 20 7% 13 5% Oral Biology 12 4% 13 4% 10 3% 12 4% Basic Science 11 3% 8 3% 11 4% 12 4% Radiology 4 1% 5 2% 8 3% 11 4% Community Dentistry/Public Health 14 4% 10 3% 10 3% 9 3% Oral Pathology 8 2% 9 3% 4 1% 8 3% Oral Medicine, DX, TX Planning 13 4% 11 4% 12 4% 7 3% Biomaterials 4 1% 5 2% 6 2% 6 2% GPR/AEGD 2 1% 4 1% 6 2% 5 2% Allied Dental 8 2% 7 2% 3 1% 4 1% Genetics/Growth and Development 6 2% 2 1% 3 1% 3 1% Other or Not Reported 26 8% 25 8% 21 7% 22 8% Total Thirty-five percent of vacant positions have been vacant for three or fewer months, with 7 percent vacant for less than one month (Table 4). This Table 3. Status of vacant faculty positions, Total Full-Time Part-Time Not Reported New Position to Be Filled Extant Position to Be Filled Not Reported Active Search Inactive Search Not Reported Table 4. Length of time positions have been vacant, Length of Time in Months Number and Percentage Number and Percentage of Total Positions of Positions with Vacant Inactive Searches Less Than One 18 7% 0 0% % 11 14% % 6 14% % 9 14% % 3 17% % 5 23% Greater Than % 3 18% Not Reported 14 5% 0 0% compares to 27 percent vacant for three or fewer months in An additional 15 percent of positions have been vacant between four and six months. Thus, half of all vacancies reported in have been open for six months or less. Twenty-four percent of the vacancies have been open for seven to twelve months. In , 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. As in , 53 percent of respondents indicated that the average time required to fill a position in general dentistry is over six months. Six percent reported that more than a year was usually required to fill such a position. The average reported time required to fill a position in a dental specialty was greater, with only 12 percent of schools reporting six months or less. Over 75 percent reported that 192 Journal of Dental Education Volume 70, Number 2

6 it typically required at least ten months to fill a dental specialty position. 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 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 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 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 In addition to positions that are filled or remain vacant but budgeted positions, each year a number of positions are reported as lost. After a sharp increase in , the number of reported lost positions dropped significantly in , from 147 to twenty-five (Table 6). 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 , 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. Most of the lost positions (80 percent) were appointments in clinical science (Table 7). 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 Dental schools were asked to report factors that influence their ability to fill a vacant position. Respondents were allowed to report more than one influencing factor. The factors reported are shown in Table 9. The most frequently reported factor in 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 , although in that year meeting requirements of the position was reported more often than salary/budget limitations. The fourth most frequently reported factor in 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). Salary/budget limitations that affect the ability to offer a competitive salary was also most fre- Table 5. Vacant positions by academic rank, Professor 38 (14%) Associate Professor 54 (19%) Assistant Professor 100 (36%) Professor or Associate Professor 14 (5%) Professor or Associate or Assistant Professor 7 (3%) Associate or Assistant Professor 34 (12%) Instructor 10 (4%) Other Rank 5 (2%) Not Reported 13 (6%) Total 275 Table 6. Lost faculty positions by type of school, Full-Time Part-Time Total Public Schools (66%) 15 83% 2 29% 17 68% Private Schools (34%) 3 17% 5 71% 8 32% Total February 2006 Journal of Dental Education 193

7 Table 7. Lost faculty positions by primary appointment, Area of Lost Positions Total Percent Primary Appointment Full-/Part-Time of Full-Time Part-Time Lost Positions Total Clinical Science % Administration % Basic Science 1-1 4% Allied Dental 1-1 4% Total by Status 18 7 Grand Total 25 Table 8. Lost faculty positions by discipline, Primary Discipline Number of Lost Positions Full-Time Part-Time Total Endodontics Prosthodontics General, Operative, Restorative Preventative Dentistry Pediatric Dentistry Oral/Maxillofacial Surgery Orthodontics Community Dentistry Dental Hygiene Oral Radiology Practice Administration Oral Pathology Table 9. Factors influencing the ability to fill a vacancy, Number of Vacancies for Which Cited Salary/Budget Limitation % Lack of Response to Position Announcement % Meeting Requirements of the Position 99 36% Meeting Scholarship Requirements 83 30% Board Eligibility/Status Requirements 33 12% Licensure Requirements 30 11% Other Department Priority/Needs 29 11% Geographic Location/Cost of Living 25 9% Other 5 2% quently cited as the most influential factor in the ability to fill a position. It was the cited as such for seventy-four (27 percent) vacant positions. The next factors most frequently cited as having the greatest influence were the ability to find a candidate meeting dental school requirements for the position (20 percent) and a candidate s ability to meet institutional scholarship requirements (15 percent). Factors Influencing Faculty Separations Information on faculty separations is obtained from the annual ADEA survey of dental educators. In there were a total of 1,039 reported faculty separations. This is a total of 9.2 percent of the dental faculty workforce. The range of faculty separations over the past five years has been from about 8 to 11 percent. In 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 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 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 The remaining 10 percent of separations were for reasons other than those listed above, such as temporary leave or sabbatical. The academic rank of faculty who separated varies by reason for separation. As would be expected, most faculty who retired were full professors (37 percent) or associate professors (30 percent). Those who entered private practice were primarily individuals with lower academic rank, including assistant professors (52 percent) and instructors (33 percent). Only 7 percent were associate professors, and less than 1 percent were full professors. The rank of those leaving for a position at another school varied, with 16 percent being full professors, 24 percent associate professors, 36 percent assistant professors, and 13 percent instructors. Fifty-two percent 194 Journal of Dental Education Volume 70, Number 2

8 Table 10. Reasons for and academic rank of faculty separations, Reported Reasons Professor Associate Assistant Instructor Other or for Separation Professor Professor Not Reported Enter private practice % Finished fixed term % Retired % Position with another school 95 13% Deceased 24 3% Other 72 10% (536 of 1,039) of departing faculty were in part-time positions. An additional 15 percent (157 of 1,039) were volunteer faculty. Twenty-seven percent (281 of 1,039) of faculty separations were full-time faculty members. The status of the remaining separations was other or not reported. Sources of New Faculty The number of new faculty reported in the ADEA survey of dental educators was 1,152. The source of new faculty was reported for 67 percent of new faculty members and is shown in Table 11. Over half of new faculty continue to come from private practice. In , 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 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. As has been the case in the past, about 50 percent of the new faculty reported in the survey entered part-time positions. An additional 25 percent entered volunteer positions. Twenty-four percent were hired as full-time faculty members, a decline from 29 percent in The status of the remaining new faculty was not reported. The distribution of faculty by employment status is similar among departing faculty and new faculty members. Table 11. Sources of new faculty, Projected Vacant Budgeted Faculty Positions Dental school deans were asked to report, on a Likert scale of 1 to 5, whether the number of current vacant positions at their school reflected a situation normal and usual to the conduct of their school (1) or more of a problem recruiting and retaining dental school faculty (5). The mean rating was 2.43 (n=53), slightly more towards normal and usual than in Twenty-eight deans (53 percent) reported a score of less than 3, indicating the vacancies are usual and normal to the operation of their dental school. Ten reported a score above 3 (19 percent), indicating that the vacancies reflected more of a recruitment and retention problem. The remaining fifteen respondents reported a score of 3. 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 From private practice 51% 52% 62% From another dental school 24% 15% 14% From graduation from an advanced education program 18% 20% 16% From dental school graduation 4% 11% 7% From the uniformed services 3% 2% 2% February 2006 Journal of Dental Education 195

9 (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 The 2004 dental faculty workforce at U.S. dental schools included 11,715 full-time, part-time, and volunteer faculty members. This is an average of over 209 administrative, clinical, and basic science faculty per dental school although the actual number varies greatly from one school to the next, given the variation in the number of students at each school. The number of faculty reported in 2004 was 11,348, indicating an increase in the number of faculty between and 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 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 and 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. The characteristics of individuals leaving for and coming from private practice are similar. Faculty who depart dental education for private practice are, on average, forty-three year-old, part-time (53 percent), nontenure track (93 percent), clinical science (90 percent) faculty at the instructor (33 percent) or assistant professor (53 percent) rank. These part-time clinical faculty likely maintain a substantial private practice while serving as part-time faculty and ultimately decide to devote their full time to their private practice. Similarly, a new faculty member entering dental education from private practice is, on average, fifty-four year-old, part-time (61 percent), nontenure track (98 percent), clinical science (95 percent) faculty at the instructor (23 percent) or assistant professor (55 percent) rank. 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. 196 Journal of Dental Education Volume 70, Number 2

10 To Academia Private Practice 61% From Academia Private Practice 36% Another School 14% Academia Another School 13% Finished Fixed Term 18% Following Dental School 7% Retired 20% Following an Adv. Educ. Program 16% Other 10% Uniformed Services 2% Deceased 3% Figure 3. New faculty and separations, 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 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 , 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 In addition, the number of positions reported as lost, rather than vacant, dropped to twenty-five, after rising from thirty-nine to 147 in 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 February 2006 Journal of Dental Education 197

11 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 Reports 3-5 offer numerous recommendations and strategies for recruitment, development, and retention of a strong faculty workforce for dental education. REFERENCES 1. Survey of dental educators, American Dental Education Association, Washington, DC. (Unpublished information.) 2. Weaver RG, Chmar JE, Haden NK, Valachovic RW. Dental school vacant budgeted faculty positions: academic year J Dent Educ 2004;69: American Association of Dental Schools. Future of dental school faculty: report of the president s task force. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, Haden NK, Beemsterboer PL, Weaver RG, Valachovic RW. Dental school faculty shortages increase: an update on future dental school faculty. J Dent Educ 2000;64: Haden NK, Weaver RG, Valachovic RW. Meeting the demand for future dental school faculty: trends, challenges, and responses. J Dent Educ 2002;66: Journal of Dental Education Volume 70, Number 2