Guideposts and Roadblocks to Career-Long Scholarly Engagement of PETE Faculty

Background/Purpose: Research and scholarship are essential for the continued advancement of physical education.  Yet, scholarly productivity declines once physical education teacher education (PETE) doctoral students graduate (Ward, Parker, Sutherland, & Sinclair, 2011) and faculty rank increases (Santo, Engstrom, Reetz, Schweinle, & Reed, 2009).  According to Dodds (2005), mentors guide higher education institutional cultures and expectations for faculty in the areas of research and teaching, but that is only one factor that may lay the foundation for continued productivity throughout a professional career.  The purpose of this study was to explore the reasons PETE faculty remain productive throughout their careers.  Research questions were: (a) What helped and guided individuals towards scholarly engagement and productivity throughout their careers? and (b) What roadblocks were encountered when engaging in scholarly productivity?

Method: Participants included nine (5 females; 4 males) senior PETE faculty members who met the criteria for “productive teacher education scholars over time”: (a) academic rank of professor or equivalent status in PETE, (b) fifteen or more years of experience within the PETE, (c) engaged in PETE research as indicated by three or more research based articles published in peer reviewed research journals over the past five years, (d) on-going research presentations in PETE over the past five years, and (e) current and active engagement in a PETE program.  Data sources included: (a) individual semi-structured interviews, (b) curriculum vitae, and (c) informal conversational interviews (Patton, 2002). 

Analysis/Results: Interview responses were analyzed using open and axial coding (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Trustworthiness was established through: triangulation (multiple investigators, multiple data sources), a researcher journal, a peer debriefer, and a member check.  Results indicated major guideposts were: collaboration, finding fit, personal balance, defining a research process, and maintaining a strong work ethic.  Roadblocks were: obligations, lack of support, access to participants, and grant writing.

Conclusions: Findings suggest that initial PETE faculty, conscious of these factors, can employ effective strategies to implement guideposts and overcome roadblocks to enhance scholarly productivity; thus preventing the potential for decline in productivity after doctoral graduation and increase in faculty rank.  A paucity of literature relating to this topic in PETE warrants the need for continued research to determine factors that influence productivity, and the benefits PETE faculty gain from engagement in scholarship over time.  The guideposts and roadblocks documented within this study could help future PETE faculty members remain productive scholars who contribute to and enhance the PETE profession.