Supply and Demand for Pedagogists in Higher Education

Wednesday, April 2, 2014
Exhibit Hall Poster Area 1 (Convention Center)
B. Ann Boyce1, Jacalyn Lund2 and Kason O'Neil1, (1)University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, (2)Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA
Background/Purpose:

The present study of Doctoral PETE (D-PETE) programs constituted the third round of data collection for the 2011-12 academic year. The purpose of the study was to examine the supply and demand issues related to doctoral PETE professionals.  Two topics were addressed: (a) a delineation of supply (doctoral graduates and their respective job placements in higher education) and (b) a determination of the demand (number of advertised positions in pedagogy and outcomes of those position searches) across three academic years (2005-06, 2008-09 & 2011-12).  For comparisons across the three academic years, two existing data sets were utilized (Boyce & Rikard, 2008; Boyce & Rikard, 2011).

Method:

Two instruments were used to determine supply (Doctoral Program Questionnaire [DPQ]) and demand (Supply and Demand Survey [SDS]).  For the 2011-12 year, the DPQ was electronically transmitted to D-PETE coordinators in September, 2011 and data collection was completed in February, 2012.    Data sources for the demand (number of PETE pedagogy positions advertised in 2005-06, 2008-09 and 2011-12 academic years) consisted of weekly checks of position advertisements in the Chronicle of Higher Education; AAHPERD Career Link and OPERA.   Using the SDS for the 2011-12 data collection cycle, the researchers contacted search chairs at the hiring institutions; this process commenced in August of 2012 and completed in February of 2013.  There was 100% response rate for participants using both instruments.  The two previous data collection cycles (2005-06 and 2008-09) followed similar dates and the same protocol. 

Analysis/Results:

Using descriptive analysis across the three academic years, the following results were revealed: (a) approximately a third of these position were filled by PETE doctorates, (b) 15% of these positions were filled by ADBs, (c) about 8% were filled by of master’s level PETE personnel for the 2008-09 and 2011-12 academic years, (d) about 12% of non-pedagogists took pedagogy jobs, and (e) approximately 35% of the position searches either failed or were withdrawn. 

Conclusions:

Since 54% of these positions were filled by pedagogists at various levels (doctorates, ABDs and master’s level) and roughly a third of the searches failed; the following conclusion was made. The demand for PETE doctorates in higher education was greater than the supply.  These findings warrant serious discussion of D-PETE professionals due to the negative impact on the pedagogy profession and the trickledown effect it could have on future PK-12 PETE teachers.